LI  B  RAR.Y 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 
OF    ILLINOIS 


T?lpEd 
v.l 


Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

eft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 

l»e?S°H-S  '"  d1lK'P»'M»y  «tion  and  may 
lt  in  dism.wal  from  the  University. 

University  of  Illinois  Library 


08Z003 


L161— O-1096 


POLITICS 


POLITICS 


BY 


HEINRICH  VON  TREITSCHKE 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN  BY 

BLANCHE  DUGDALE  &  TORBEN  DE  BILLE 

WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION  BY  THE 

RT.  HON.  ARTHUR  JAMES   BAI^FOUR 

M.A.,  F.R.S.,  LL.D.,  D.C.L. 
AND  A  FOREWORD  BY 

A.  LAWRENCE   LOWELL 

PRESIDENT  OF  HARVARD  UNIVERSITY 

IN  TWO  VOLUMES 
VOL.   I 


NEW  YORK 

THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 
1916 


V  A 


CO 

CONTENTS 

PAG* 

INTRODUCTION       .  .  .  .  .  .        vii 

AUTHOR'S  PREFACE  .....     xxix 

FOREWORD  .  .  .  .  .  .      xliii 

FIRST   BOOK 

THE  NATURE  OF  THE  STATE 

I.  THE  STATE  IDEA    .  .  .  .  .8 

II.   THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE      .  .  .  .60 

III.  THE  STATE  IN  RELATION  TO  THE  MORAL  LAW  .        81 

IV.  THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES       .              .  .107 
V.   GOVERNMENT  AND  THE  GOVERNED    .              .  .184 

ct  SECOND   BOOK 

i 

THE  SOCIAL  FOUNDATIONS  OF  THE  STATE 

I*        VI.   LAND  AND  PEOPLE  .  .  .  .199 

*4      VII.  THE  FAMILY  .....     284 

VIII.   RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS  .  .  .     270 

C 
8      IX.   CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES   ....      803 

X.   RELIGION     ......  323 

<.9      XI.   NATIONAL  EDUCATION  ....  362 

Q    XII.   POLITICAL  ECONOMY  .  .  .  888 

v 


348321 


INTRODUCTION 

UNTIL  the  late  Professor  Cramb  published 
his  Germany  and  England,  Treitschke  was 
scarcely  even  a  name  to  the  British  public. 
Even  now  his  name  is  much  better  known 
than  his  books.  This  is  partly  due  to  the 
fact  that  his  main  work  was  an  unfinished 
history  of  modern  Germany,  and  that  much 
of  this  dealt  with  the  period  which  began 
with  the  peace  of  1815,  and  ended  with  the 
Bismarckian  era, — a  period  rich  in  scientific, 
philosophical,  and  musical  achievement,  but 
politically  barren  and,  to  the  foreigner,  dull. 
It  is  also  due  to  the  fact  that  the  full  signi- 
ficance of  the  political  theories  to  which  the 
following  lectures  are  devoted  has  only  re- 
cently been  made  plain.  Political  theories, 
from  those  of  Aristotle  downwards,  have 
ever  been  related,  either  by  harmony  or  con- 
trast, to  the  political  practice  of  their  day  : 
but  of  no  theories  is  this  more  glaringly  true 

vii 


viii  INTRODUCTION 

than  of  those  expounded  in  these  volumes. 
They  could  not  have  been  written  before 
1870.  Nothing  quite  like  them  will  be 
written  after  1917.  They  bear  somewhat 
the  same  relation  to  Bismarck  as  Machia- 
velli's  Prince  bears  to  Caesar  Borgia : — 
though  no  one  would  put  Treitschke  on  a 
level  with  Machiavelli,  or  Borgia  on  a  level 
with  Bismarck. 

Their  author,  born  in  1834,  and  twenty- 
seven  when  William  I.  became  King  of 
Prussia,  with  Bismarck  as  his  Minister,  is 
thus  qualified  by  age  to  represent  the  gener- 
ation which,  in  its  youth,  sought  in  '  Liberal 
principles '  the  means  of  furthering  its 
national  ideals  ;  found  them  utterly  im- 
potent and  ineffectual ;  and  welcomed  with 
patriotic  fervour  the  Bismarckian  policy  of 
'  blood  and  iron/ 

It  is  permissible  to  conjecture  that  if  the 
political  creed  of  Treitschke's  youth  had 
borne  the  practical  fruit  which  he  so  passion- 
ately desired,  the  subsequent  history  of  the 
world  would  have  been  wholly  different.: 
If  '  Liberalism/  in  the  continental  sense,1 

1  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  observe  that  I  use  the  words  '  Liberal 
principles '  and  '  Liberalism '  in  their  continental,  not  in  their  British, 
meaning.  We  borrowed  them  from  abroad,  and  have  used  them  to 
designate  a  particular  party,  or,  rather,  a  particular  section  of  a  par- 


INTRODUCTION  ix 

had  given  Germany  empire  and  power, 
militarism  would  never  have  grown  to  its 
present  exorbitant  proportions.  The  greatest 
tragedy  of  modern  times  is  that  she  owes 
her  unity  and  her  greatness  not  to  the  free 
play  of  public  opinion  acting  through  con- 
stitutional machinery,  but  to  the  unscrupu- 
lous genius  of  one  great  man,  who  found  in 
the  Prussian  monarchy,  and  the  Prussian 
military  system,  fitting  instruments  for 
securing  German  ideals. 

The  main  interest  then  of  these  lectures 
to  me,  and  perhaps  to  others,  lies  in  the  fact 
that  they  represent  the  mature  thought  of  a 
vigorous  personality,  who,  in  early  manhood, 
saw  the  war  with  Denmark,  the  war  with 
Austria,  and  the  war  with  France,  create, 
in  violation  of  all  '  Liberal  '  principles, 
that  German  Empire  for  which  German 
Liberals  had  vainly  striven.  War,  it  was 
evident,  could  be  both  glorious  and  cheap; 
absolute  monarchy  had  shown  itself  the 
only  effective  instrument  for  national  self- 
realisation  ;  a  diplomatic  and  military  policy, 
carried  through  in  defiance  of  public  opinion, 

ticular  party,  But  '  Liberalism  '  as  used  in  its  original  home  is  a  name 
for  principles  of  constitutional  liberty  and  representative  Government, 
which  have  long  been  the  common  property  of  all  parties  throughout  the 
English-speaking  portions  of  the  world. 


x  INTRODUCTION 

had  performed  in  months  what  generations 
of  debaters  had  been  unable  to  accomplish. 

It  is  useless,  of  course,  to  look  for  im- 
partiality in  the  political  speculations  born 
under  such  conditions.  Forty  or  fifty  years 
ago  the  ordinary  British  reader  sought  in 
German  historical  research  a  refuge  from 
the  party  bias  so  common  among  British 
historians.  Hume,  Lingard,  Alison,  Mac- 
aulay,  Carlyle,  Froude,  Freeman,  all  in  their 
several  ways  looked  at  their  selected  periods 
through  glasses  coloured  by  their  own  poli- 
tical or  theological  predilections.  Mitford 
and  Grote  carried  their  modern  prejudices 
into  their  pictures  of  classical  antiquity. 
But  the  German  historian,  though  his  true 
course  might  perhaps  be  deflected  by  some 
over  -  ingenious  speculation,  was  free  (we 
supposed)  from  these  cruder  and  more  human 
sources  of  error.  He  might  be  dull,  but  he 
was  at  least  impartial.  With  the  develop- 
ment of  German  unity,  however,  German 
impartiality  vanished.  To  Ranke  succeeded 
Von  Sybel  and  Mommsen.  Political  de- 
tachment could  no  longer  be  looked  for ; 
learning  was  yoked  to  politics ;  and  history 
was  written  with  a  purpose.  In  no  one 
does  this  patriotic  prejudice  produce  more 


INTRODUCTION  xi 

curious  results  than  in  Treitschke.  His 
loves  and  his  hates,  his  hopes  and  his  fears, 
his  praise  and  his  blame,  his  philosophic 
theories,  his  practical  suggestions,  all  draw 
their  life  from  the  conviction  that  German 
greatness  was  due  to  her  military  system, 
that  her  military  system  was  the  creation 
of  Prussia,  and  that  Prussia  was  the  creation 
of  Hohenzollern  absolutism. 

Consider,  for  example,  his  abstract  theory 
of  the  State  which  colours  all  his  more 
important  political  speculation.  An  English 
writer  who  wished  to  set  forth  his  views 
on  Education,  Local  Government,  Military 
Organisation,  and  so  forth,  might  perhaps 
regard  an  abstract  theory  of  the  State  as  a 
superfluous  luxury.  But  then,  as  Treitschke 
explains  in  another  connection,  the  English 
are  shallow,  and  the  Germans  profound,  so 
that  this  difference  of  treatment  is  natural ; 
and  certainly  the  English  reader  has  no 
ground  for  regretting  it.  For  though  the 
theory  itself  is  neither  very  profound,  nor, 
indeed,  very  coherent ;  though  its  appeals 
to  history  are  unconvincing ;  it  gives  the 
key  to  all  that  follows ;  it  explains  and 
justifies  modern  Germany.  The  State,  says 
Treitschke,  is  Power.  So  unusual  is  its 


xii  INTRODUCTION 

power  that  it  has  no  power  to  limit  its 
power ;  hence  no  Treaty,  when  it  becomes 
inconvenient,  can  be  binding ;  hence  the 
very  notion  of  general  arbitration  is  absurd  ; 
hence  war  is  part  of  the  Divine  order.  Small 
States  must  be  contemptible  because  they 
must  be  weak  ;  success  is  the  test  of  merit ; 
power  is  its  reward  ;  and  all  nations  get 
what  they  deserve. 

A  theory  of  politics  entirely  governed  by 
patriotic  passion  is  not  likely  to  be  either 
very  impartial  or  very  profound.  Even  the 
most  dexterous  literary  treatment  could 
hardly  hide  its  inherent  narrowness.  But 
Treitschke,  to  do  him  justice,  attempts  no 
disguises.  He  airs  his  prejudices  with  a 
naivete  truly  amazing.  I  will  not  say  that 
he  wanted  humour.  Many  things  struck 
him  as  exquisitely  comic  ; — small  States,  for 
example,  and  the  Dutch  language.  He 
occasionally  enlivened  his  lectures,  we  are 
told,  by  a  satirical  imitation  of  a  British 
'  hurrah/  He  clearly,  therefore,  possessed 
his  own  sense  of  fun,  yet  he  remained  sadly 
lacking  in  that  prophylactic  humour  which 
protects  its  possessor  against  certain  forms 
of  extravagance  and  absurdity. 

In    nothing   does    this    come   out    more 


INTRODUCTION  xiii 

clearly  than  in  his  excessive  laudation  of  his 
own  countrymen,  and  his  not  less  excessive 
depreciation  of  everybody  else.  Partly  no 
doubt  this  was  done  for  a  purpose.  He  had 
formed  the  opinion,  rather  surprising  to  a 
foreigner,  that  the  Germans,  as  a  nation, 
are  unduly  diffident ; — always  in  danger  of 
"  enervating  their  nationality  through  pos- 
sessing too  little  rugged  national  pride/'1 
It  must  be  owned  that  very  little  of  this 
weakness  is  likely  to  remain  in  any  German 
who  takes  Treitschke  seriously.  Neverthe- 
less, it  should  have  been  possible  to  explain 
to  the  German  people  how  much  better  they 
are  than  the  rest  of  the  world  without  pour- 
ing crude  abuse  upon  every  other  nation. 
If  the  German  be  indeed  deficient  in  'rugged 
pride/  by  all  means  tell  him  what  a  fine 
fellow  he  really  is.  But  why  spoil  the  com- 
pliment by  lowering  the  standard  of  com- 
parison ?  It  may,  for  example,  be  judicious 
to  encourage  the  too  diffident  Prussians  by 
assuring  them  that  they  "  are  by  their 
character  more  reasonable  and  more  free 
than  Frenchmen/' 2  But  when  the  Prussian 
reader  discovers  that  in  Treitschke's  opinion 
the  French  are  excessively  unreasonable  and 

1  I.  19-20.  2  I.  66. 

b 


xiv  INTRODUCTION 

quite  incapable  of  freedom  the  effect  is 
marred.  If,  again,  it  be  needful  to  remind 
the  Germans  of  their  peculiar  sensibility  to 
the  beauties  of  Nature,  is  it  necessary  to 
emphasise  their  superiority  by  explaining 
that  when  resting  in  a  forest  they  lie  upon 
their  backs,  while  the  Latin  races,  less  hap- 
pily endowed,  repose  upon  their  stomachs  ? 1 
Inordinate  self-esteem  may  be  a  very 
agreeable  quality.  Those  who  possess  it 
are  often  endowed  with  an  imperturbable 
complacency  which  softens  social  intercourse, 
and  is  not  inconsistent  with  some  kindly 

w 

feeling  towards  those  whom  they  deem  to 
be  their  inferiors.  But  it  must  be  acknow- 
ledged that  with  Treitschke  this  quality 
does  not  appear  in  its  most  agreeable  form. 
With  him  it  is  censorious,  and  full  of  sus- 
picion. Unlike  Charity  it  greatly  vaunteth 
itself ;  unlike  Charity  it  thinketh  all  evil. 
Rare  indeed  are  the  references  to  other 
nations  which  do  not  hold  them  up  to  hatred 
or  contempt.  America,  France,  Austria, 
Spain,  Russia,  Britain  are  in  turn  required 
to  supply  the  sombre  background  against 
which  the  virtues  of  Germany  shine  forth 
with  peculiar  lustre.  The  Dutch,  we  are 

1  I.  206. 


INTRODUCTION  xv 

told,  have  "  deteriorated  morally  and  physic- 
ally/' l  Americans  are  mere  money-grabbers. 
The  Russians  are  barbarians.  The  Latin 
races  are  degenerate.  The  English  have  lost 
such  poor  virtues  as  they  once  possessed ; 
while  their  "want  of  chivalry"  shocks  the 
"simple  fidelity  of  the  German  nature."2 
Cannot  the  subjects  of  the  Kaiser  realise 
"  the  simple  fidelity  of  their  German  nature" 
without  being  reminded  how  forcibly  that 
"  simple  fidelity  "  is  impressed  by  "  the  want 
of  chivalry  in  the  English  character"?  But, 
when  Treitschke  allows  his  statements  of 
fact  and  his  moral  judgment  to  be  violently 
distorted  by  national  prejudice,  his  errors 
become  more  serious.  We  need  not  quarrel 
over  these  opinions.  They  are  made  by  a 
German  for  Germans,  and  doubtless  they 
suit  their  market. 

Nor  do  I  here  refer  to  his  wider  generalisa- 
tions, though  I  often  disagree  with  him.  I 
think,  for  example,  that  he  exaggerates  the 
absorption  of  the  individual  by  the  com- 
munity in  the  city  States  of  antiquity  ;  and 
his  classification  of  various  forms  of  govern- 
ment has  not  much  to  recommend  it.  On 
such  questions,  however,  judgments  may 

1  I.  50.  a  II.  395. 


xvi  INTRODUCTION 

differ,  but  what  are  we  to  say  of  the  mis- 
statements  of  bare  historical  fact  in  which 
he  indulges  without  scruple  ?  Some  of  these 
no  doubt  are  mere  slips,  as,  for  example, 
when  he  places  the  activities  of  Titus  Gates 
in  the  reign  of  James  II.1 ;  others  are 
unimportant  exhibitions  of  ignorance,  as 
when  he  assures  his  readers  that  in  England 
there  are  no  Crown  lands 2 ;  others,  again,  are 
mere  exercises  of  the  imagination,  as  when 
he  tells  us  that,  "after  Henry  the  VIII/s 
hymeneal  prodigies,  it  was  enacted  by 
Parliament  that  its  assent  was  necessary  to 
the  validity  of  any  Royal  marriage." 3 

These  blunders  are  presumably  due  to 
want  of  memory  or  want  of  care.  But  others 
are  the  offspring  of  invincible  prejudice. 
When  he  tells  us  that  England  "turns  a 
deaf  ear  on  principle  to  generous  ideas,"4 
the  judgment  may  to  an  Englishman 
appear  absurd,  and,  in  the  mouth  of  a 
German,  even  impudent.  Yet  it  must  to 
a  certain  extent  be  a  matter  of  opinion. 
Character  cannot  be  tested  in  retorts  or 
weighed  in  balances.  But  what  excuse 
can  there  be  for  such  a  particular  historical 
statement  as  that  "  England's  first  thought 

i  II.  473.  2  II.  490.  3  ii.  165.  4  n.  614< 


INTRODUCTION  xvii 

in  abolishing  slavery  was  the  destruction 
of  Colonial  competition," l  for  there  was  not, 
and  could  not  be,  any  possible  competition 
between  British  manufacturers  and  the 
producers  of  slave-grown  sugar,  so  that  the 
charge  is  not  even  plausible. 

Again,  there  is  something  peculiarly 
absurd  in  the  statement  that  "no  sooner 
had  the  French  Revolution  broken  out  than 
Pitt  eagerly  began  to  urge  a  reform  of  the 
Franchise." 2  This  is  not  merely  a  mis-state- 
ment of  fact.  It  is  a  mis-statement  of  fact 
which  shows  an  utter  want  of  compre- 
hension of  English  political  history  at  the 
period  referred  .to.  There  is  no  reason  why 
even  a  Professor  of  Modern  History  at  the 
University  of  Berlin  should  know  the  details 
of  Pitt's  abortive  efforts  at  Parliamentary 
reform  ;  but  he  ought  to  know  enough  of 
the  subject  to  prevent  him  mistaking  the 
whole  significance  of  the  facts  to  which  he 
refers.  Treitschke's  blunder  is  not  merely 
one  of  chronology ;  it  shows  a  complete 
misapprehension  of  the  true  relations  be- 
tween the  French  Revolution  and  English 
constitutional  development.  So  far  from  the 
outbreak  of  the  French  Revolution  having 

1  I.  162.  2  II.  157. 


xviii  INTRODUCTION 

inspired  Pitt  to  attempt  Parliamentary 
reform,  it  put  a  sudden  and  violent  stop  to 
a  repetition  of  the  efforts  he  had  already 
made.  In  other  countries  the  spirit  of  the 
French  Revolution  may  have  stimulated 
political  development.  In  Britain  its  excesses 
killed  political  development  for  a  generation. 
One  more  example  of  Treitschke's  extra- 
ordinary carelessness  I  will  give,  because  it 
illustrates  his  shortcomings  as  a  student 
of  Comparative  Politics.  He  is  drawing  a 
parallel  between  the  German  and  the  British 
methods  of  settling  the  relations  between 
executive  authority  and  the  rights  of  indi- 
vidual citizens.  He  acknowledges  that  in 
Germany  magistrates  and  police  possess 
powers  far  in  excess  of  those  possessed  by 
the  corresponding  authorities  in  Britain  ; 
he  acknowledges  that  these  powers  may  be 
abused.  But  this,  he  argues,  is  the  least  of 
two  evils.  The  British  system  would,  in  his 
judgment,  be  quite  unworkable  if  it  could 
not  be  immediately  suspended  in  case  of 
emergency.  England,  he  tells  his  hearers, 
is  continually  proclaiming  Martial  Law ; 
according  to  him  no  year  passes  without  the 
Riot  Act  being  read 1 ;  and  when  the  Riot 

1  I.  157. 


INTRODUCTION  xix 

Act  is  read  he  supposes  the  whole  machinery 
of  ordinary  law  to  be  put  out  of  gear. 
This,  it  need  hardly  be  observed,  is  nonsense 
from  beginning  to  end.  Martial  Law  is  never 
proclaimed  ;  many  years  pass  without  the 
Riot  Act  being  read ;  and  when  the  Riot 
Act  is  read,  the  machinery  of  law  is  neither 
stopped,  nor  in  the  slightest  degree  inter- 
fered with.1 

Abuse  of  Britain,  Holland,  and  America, 
contemptuous  references  to  the  Latin  nations, 
extravagant  laudations  of  everything  Ger- 
man (except  indeed  the  small  Courts  of  Ger- 
many), still  more  extravagant  laudations  of 
everything  Prussian,  and,  particularly,  the 
Prussian  Monarchy,  are  but  the  setting  in- 
tended to  throw  into  high  relief  his  own 
national  ideals.  We  are  all  familiar  with  \ 
the  stock  character  in  fiction  of  the  nouveau 
riche,  who  is  at  once  justly  proud  of  having 
made  his  own  fortune,  and  bitterly  con- 
temptuous of  those  who  have  inherited 
theirs.  They  are,  in  his  eyes,  weak,  de- 
generate, and  incompetent,  unworthy  of  the 
fortunes  which  ancestral  energy,  or  ancestral 
luck,  has  conferred  upon  them.  But  in  the 

1  This  Introduction  is  by  no  means  intended  as  a  Review  of  Treitschke's 
Lectures,  and  this  list  of  inaccuracies,  drawn  entirely  from  Treitschke's 
references  to  England,  has  no  pretensions  to  be  complete. 


xx  INTRODUCTION 

very  midst  of  his  envious  indignation,  he 
cannot  shake  off  the  ambition  to  follow  in 
their  steps  ;  he  must  imitate  those  whom  he 
affects  to  despise. 

I  do  not  know  whether  there  is  anything 
in  real  life  corresponding  to  this  fancy 
picture ;  but  in  the  commonwealth  of 
nations  the  part  is  aptly  played  by  the 
German  Empire  as  Treitschke  would  have 
it.  Consider,  for  example,  his  views  on 
colonisation.  It  is  not  easy  to  see  why 
colonial  possessions  appeal  so  strongly  to 
his  imagination ;  for  he  dislikes  new  coun- 
tries almost  more  than  he  dislikes  every  old 
country  except  Germany.  The  notion,  for 
example,  that  the  culture  of  the  new  world 
can  ever  rival  the  culture  of  the  old  seems 
to  him  absurd.  He  observes,  though  not  in 
these  lectures,  that  a  German  who  goes  to 
the  United  States  is  "  lost  to  civilisation  " — 
an  amiable  sentiment  which  seems  hardly 
consistent  with  the  passion  for  acquiring 
new  countries.  But  the  real  reason  for 
these  ambitions  becomes  plain  on  further 
examination.  While  Germany  was  in  the 
throes  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War,  or  slowly 
recovering  from  its  effects,  England,  the 
detested  rival,  was  laying  the  foundations  of 


INTRODUCTION  xxi 

the  English-speaking  communities  beyond 
the  seas  ;  and  while  Frederick  the  Great 
was  robbing  his  neighbours,  and  his  suc- 
cessors were  struggling  with  the  forces  let 
loose  by  the  French  Revolution,  the  hold 
of  English-speaking  peoples  upon  regions 
outside  Europe  increased  and  strengthened. 

This  was  quite  enough  for  Treitschke. 
What  Britain  had  must  be  worth  having. 
If  there  was  something  worth  having  and 
Germany  had  it  not,  this  must  be  due  to  the 
bad  luck  which  sometimes  pursues  even  the 
most  deserving.  If  Germany  had  it  not  and 
England  had  it,  this  must  be  due  to  the  good 
luck  which  sometimes  befalls  even  the  most 
incompetent.  But  such  inequalities  are  not 
to  be  tolerated.  They  must  be  redressed,  if 
need  be  by  force.  The  "outcome  (he  tells 
us)  of  our  next  successful  war  must  be  the 
acquisition  of  Colonies  by  any  possible 
means/' l 

It  would  seem,  however,  that  Treitschke 
was  dimly  aware  that  even  to  a  German 
audience  such  a  doctrine  might  seem  a  trifle 
cynical.  He  therefore  advances  a  subtler 
motive  for  these  colonial  ambitions.  Ger- 
many, he  tells  us,  should  bear  a  part  in  the 

1  I.  119. 


xxii  INTRODUCTION 

improvement  of  inferior  races.  She  should 
become  a  pioneer  of  civilisation  in  savage 
lands.  To  outside  observers,  indeed,  it  does 
not  appear  that  either  the  practice  of  his 
countrymen,  or  his  own  theories,  suggest 
that  Germany  has  any  particular  qualifica- 
tions for  this  missionary  enterprise.  What 
is  likely  to  be  the  fate  of  coloured  races 
under  German  domination,  when  men  like 
Treitschke  frankly  avow  that  "in  Livonia 
and  Kurland  there  is  no  other  course  open 
to  us  (the  Germans)  but  to  keep  the  subject 
races  in  as  uncivilised  a  condition  as  pos- 
sible, and  thus  prevent  them  becoming  a 
danger  to  the  handful  of  their  conquerors." l 
Here  we  come  back  to  the  fundamental 
thought  of  Treitschke,  the  State  as  Will  to 
Power,  and  to  his  patriotic  corollary  that  a 
Prussianised  Germany  under  a  Hohenzollern 
dynasty  should  enable  that  thought  to  be 
realised.  In  supporting  this  view  there  is 
no  extravagance,  historical  or  moral,  from 
which  he  shrinks.  He  tells  us,  for  example, 
that  Frederick  the  Great  was  the  "  greatest 
King  who  ever  reigned  on  earth/'2  He 
accordingly  finds  in  him  the  most  un- 
expected virtues.  Frederick's  dominating 

1  I.  122.  2  II.  68. 


INTRODUCTION  xxiii 

motive  towards  the  end  of  his  life  was, 
it  seems,  "the  desire  to  execute  ideal 
justice/'1  A  noble  desire  truly  ;  but  surely 
not  one  which  would  find  any  sufficient  satis- 
faction in  the  first  partition  of  Poland,  Do 
you  ask  the  reason  for  this  extravagance  of 
laudation?  The  answer  is  that  Frederick 
was  the  greatest  of  the  Hohenzollerns,  that 
the  Hohenzollerns  created  the  Prussian 
State  and  the  Prussian  Army,  that  the 
Prussian  State  and  the  Prussian  Army 
created  Germany.  Treitschke  positively 
gloats  over  Prussian  supremacy.  "  The  Will 
of  the  German  Empire/'  he  observes,  "  must 
in  the  last  resort  be  the  will  of  Prussia."2 
All  small  States  are  ridiculous,  but  the 
most  ridiculous  of  small  States  are  the 
Kingdoms  of  Bavaria,  Saxony,  and  Wiir- 
temberg.  "The  German  Army,  not  the 
German  Parliament,  is  in  Germany  the 
real  and  effective  bond  of  national  union/' 3 
And  the  German  Army  is  a  Prussian 
creation. 

He  does  not,  of  course,  pretend  that  a 
Hohenzollern  can  do  no  wrong.  He  goes 
the  length,  indeed,  of  accusing  one  of 
them,  Frederick  William  IV.,  of  "deadly 

1  II.  69.  2  II.  375.  *  II.  390. 


xxiv  INTRODUCTION 

crime." l  And  what  was  this  deadly  crime  ? 
It  was,  that  after  sending  in  troops  to 
assist  the  Kings  of  Bavaria  and  Saxony  to 
restore  order,  he  withdrew  them  without 
destroying  the  independence  of  the  States 
he  had  gone  to  protect.  He  behaved  like 
a  gentleman,  but  he  sinned  against  the  law 
of  force. 

But  in  spite  of  this  lapse  from  patriotic 
virtue,  and  notwithstanding  that  it  is 
difficult  to  say  much  in  favour  of  any  of 
Frederick  the  Great's  successors  until  we 
come  to  William  I.,  Treitschke  holds  firmly 
to  the  belief  that  the  Prussian  Monarchy  is 
a  thing  apart,  and  that  Hohenzollern  royalty 
is  not  as  other  royalties.  Sometimes,  indeed, 
this  sentiment  shows  itself  in  a  somewhat 
ludicrous  fashion.  For  example,  Treitschke 
vigorously  defends  the  use  of  classical  studies 
in  the  education  of  youth.  There  is  no  way, 
according  to  him,  in  which  intellect  and  taste 
can  be  more  successfully  developed  than  by 
a  thorough  study  of  Greek  and  Latin.2 
So  far,  so  good.  But  a  little  further  on 
the  lecturer  has  to  deal  not  with  the 
education  of  ordinary  mankind,  but  with 
that  of  a  German  Prince,  and  we  find  to  our 

1  I.  95.  2  I.  375. 


INTRODUCTION  xxv 

surprise  that  in  the  case  of  a  German  Prince 
the  marvellous  advantages  of  classical  study 
are  quite  unnecessary.  He  must  learn 
French  and  English.  Why  should  he  do 
more?  "Why  on  earth  should  he  be 
bothered  with  Latin,  let  alone  Greek?"1 
We  rub  our  eyes  and  ask  what  this 
outburst  can  mean.  Are  intellect  and 
taste  of  no  value  to  a  German  prince  ? 
Or  is  a  German  prince  privileged  by  the 
Grace  of  God  to  acquire  these  gifts  without 
education,  or  by  an  education  inapplicable 
to  the  common  herd  ?  We  may  be  sure 
that  none  of  these  alternatives  represent 
Treitschke's  considered  views.  I  hazard 
another  guess.  I  suggest  that  the  lecturer 
must  have  known  some  young  Hohenzollern 
Prince  well  acquainted  with  modern  lan- 
guages, but  with  no  pretensions  to  classical 
scholarship. 

From  these  brief  criticisms  the  reader  will 
be  able  to  form  some  conjecture  as  to  what 
he  may  expect  to  find  in  the  following  pages. 
He  will  find  many  acute  observations  forcibly 
expressed,  and  presumably  accurate,  upon 
German  history,  contemporary  and  recent. 
He  will  find  many  observations  forcibly 

1  II.  72. 


xxvi  INTRODUCTION 

expressed,  but  certainly  inaccurate,  upon 
foreign  history,  contemporary  and  recent. 
He  will  throughout  find  himself  in  the 
presence  of  a  vigorous  personality,  with 
clear-cut  views  about  the  future  of  his 
country  and  the  methods  whereby  they  are 
to  be  realised,  but  he  will  not  find  breadth 
of  view,  generous  sympathies,  or  systematic 
thought.  In  Treitschke  there  is  nothing 
profound,  and  his  political  speculations  are 
held  together  not  so  much  by  consistent 
thought  as  by  the  binding  power  of  one 
ruling  passion. 

The  result  is  curiously  interesting.  Treit- 
schke was  a  man  of  wide,  although  not 
apparently  of  very  accurate,  knowledge. 
Fragments  of  Christianity,  of  Ethics,  of 
Liberalism,  are  casually  embedded  in  the 
concrete  blocks  out  of  which  he  has  built 
his  political  system  ;  but  they  are  foreign 
bodies  which  do  nothing  to  strengthen  the 
structure.  Power  based  on  war  is  his  ideal, 
and  the  verdict  of  war  not  only  must  be 
accepted,  but  ought  to  be  accepted.  The 
sentimentalist  may  regret  that  Athens  fell 
before  Sparta,  that  Florence  dwindled  before 
Venice,  but  the  wise  man  knows  better. 
Art  and  imagination  do  not  contribute  to 


INTRODUCTION  xxvii 

Power,  and  it  is  only  Power  that  counts. 
On  it  everything  is  based,  by  it  everything 
is  justified.  It  even  supplies  a  short  cut  to 
conclusions  which  reason  may  hesitate  to 
adopt.  It  required,  as  Treitschke  observes, 
the  battlefields  of  Bohemia  and  the  Main  to 
'convince'  the  German  people  that  Prussia 
should  control  their  destinies.1 

It  is  not  surprising  that  a  man  who  held 
these  views  should  regard  with  something 
like  disgust  and  dismay  the  attempts  of  well- 
meaning  persons  to  bring  peace  on  earth. 
The  whole  tribe  of  pacificists  who  would 
substitute  arbitration  for  war  fill  him  with 
loathing.  Like  them  he  has  his  ideals,  but 
they  are  of  a  very  different  order.  His 
Utopia  appears  to  be  a  world  in  which  all 
small  States  have  been  destroyed,  and  in 
which  the  large  States  are  all  either  fight- 
ing, or  preparing  for  battle.  "  War/'  he 
says,  "  will  endure  to  the  end  of  history. 
The  laws  of  human  thought  and  of  human 
nature  forbid  any  alternative,  neither  is  one 
to  be  wished  for." 2 

Deeply  as  he  despised  those  who,  in  his 
own  phrase,  "  rave  about  everlasting  peace," 
there  are  transient  moments  in  which  he 

1  I.  66.  2  I.  65. 


xxviii  INTRODUCTION 

almost  seems  to  fear  them.  Even  the  most 
robust  faith  will  sometimes  weaken  ;  for  a 
moment  even  Treitschke  trembles  at  the 
thought  that  men  may  cease  to  cut  each 
other's  throats.  "What,"  he  pathetically 
asks,  "if  war  should  really  disappear,  and 
with  it  all  movement  and  all  growth  ? " l 
What  if  mankind  should  deliberately  deprive 
itself  of  the  one  remedy  for  an  ailing 
civilisation  ? 

The  thought  is  terrible,  but,  supported  by 
religion,  Treitschke's  confidence  remains  un- 
moved. "  Are  not  the  great  strides  civilisa- 
tion makes  against  barbarism  and  unreason 
only  made  actual  by  the  sword  ? " 2  Does 
not  the  Bible  say  that  "greater  love  hath 
no  man  than  to  lay  down  his  life  for  his 
friend  "  ?  Are  we  then  going  to  be  seduced 
by  the  "  blind  worshippers  of  an  eternal 
peace  "  ? 3  No.  Let  us  reject  these  unworthy 
thoughts :  being  well  assured  that  "the 
God  above  us  will  see  to  it  that  war  shall 
return  again,  a  terrible  medicine  for  man- 
kind diseased."4 

Since  these  lectures  were  delivered  the 
longed  -  for  medicine  has  been  supplied  in 
overflowing  measure.  Even  the  physician 

1  I.  68.  2  I.  65.  3  I.  65.  4  I.  69. 


INTRODUCTION  xxix 

himself  could  hardly  ask  for  more.  Yet 
were  he  here  to  watch  the  application  of  his 
favourite  remedy,  what  would  he  say  of  the 

patient  ? 

A.  J.  B. 

March  1916. 


AUTHOR'S    INTRODUCTION 

POLITICS  must  be  counted  among  the  Arts.  It 
moves  in  the  world  of  historical  facts,  and  is 
continually  changing  and  taking  new  forms. 
Every  theory  must  therefore  remain  incomplete, 
and  there  is  besides  another  cause  why  un- 
biassed political  reasoning  is  very  difficult  for 
us  men  of  the  present  day.  The  life  of  modern 
peoples  has  a  strong  social  tendency.  Nowadays, 
unless  a  man  is  a  Government  official,  he  devotes 
most  of  his  labour  to  scientific  or  industrial 
interests,  and  he  takes  no  practical  part  in  the 
State  except  by  exercising  his  vote,  or  at  most 
by  administering  some  unpaid  office. 

In  order  to  understand  the  dignity  of  the 
State,  a  modern  citizen  must  free  himself  from 
a  great  many  preconceived  ideas.  What  we 
call  political  opinions  are  generally  coloured  by 
private  interests,  either  social  or  economic. 

Only  in  time  of  war  does  the  importance  of 
politics  really  come  home  to  us.  In  a  life  of 
peace  and  quiet  most  people  give  little  thought 
to  the  State,  and  are  therefore  willingly  disposed 
to  underrate  it. 

Just  as  Art  and  Science  only  renewed  their 
truth  and  greatness  through  plunging  into  the 
life-giving  streams  of  classical  antiquity,  even 


XXXI 


xxxii       AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

so  must  we,  abandoning  the  social  outlook  of 
our  own  time,  grasp  as  the  Ancients  did  the  true 
meaning  and  grandeur  of  the  State.  He  who 
wishes  to  gain  a  right  conception  of  politics 
must  steep  himself  in  the  spirit  of  the  time 
which  produced  the  Politics  of  Aristotle,  that 
greatest  masterpiece  of  political  theory.  In  the 
light  of  its  author's  genius  we  see  ourselves 
to  be  mere  bunglers.  We  must,  moreover,  learn 
to  understand  the  Ancients'  conception  of  the 
State.  In  so  doing  we  run  no  danger  of  making 
their  mistake  and  overestimating  the  value  of 
public  life.  The  different  circumstances  of  our 
lives  prevent  this,  and  above  all  that  recognition 
of  our  undying  personality  which  Christianity 
has  brought  us,  through  which  we  realise  that 
man  can  never  be  merely  a  member  of  the  State, 
when  he  is  free  to  think  as  he  will  of  God  and 
the  Kingdom  of  God.  Being  therefore  without 
fear  of  lapsing  into  the  conception  which  looked 
upon  men  only  as  citizens,  we  may  strive  to 
grasp  that  genuine  theory  of  Politics  which 
enabled  the  Ancients  to  deal  with  political 
problems  primarily  in  the  interest  of  the  many, 
and  secondly  in  that  of  the  individual. 

To  them  Politics  meant  simply  the  science  of 
government,  and  they  included  in  this  both 
the  department  of  political  economy  and  of 
constitutional  law.  The  task  of  Politics  is  three- 
fold. It  must  first  seek  to  discover,  through 
contemplation  of  the  actual  body  politic,  what 
is  the  fundamental  idea  of  the  State.  It  must 
then  consider  historically  what  the  nations  have 
desired  in  their  political  life,  what  they  have 


POLITICS  AND  THE  ANCIENTS  xxxiii 

created,  what  they  have  accomplished,  and  how 
they  have  accomplished  it.  This  will  lead  on 
to  the  third  object,  the  discovery  of  certain 
historic  laws  and  the  setting  forth  of  some 
moral  imperatives. 

Thus  understood,  Politics  becomes  applied 
history.  No  further  explanation  is  needed  as 
to  why  it  lags  to-day  so  far  behind  the  other 
sciences.  The  descriptive  historian  feels  little 
inclination  to  extract  a  theory  from  his  facts, 
and  on  the  other  hand  the  historical  sense  has 
penetrated  slowly  to  the  minds  of  jurists 
and  philosophers.  This  is  the  reason  why 
no  work  upon  politics  exists  at  present  which 
in  any  degree  fulfils  the  requirements  of  the 
historian.  The  best  is  Dahlmann's  Politics,  a 
book  already  more  than  fifty  years  behind  the 
times.  Scientific  politics  itself,  as  Bluntschli 
represented  it,  is  still  hampered  by  the  old 
theory  of  Natural  Law. 

It  was  Herder  who  first  taught  the  German 
nation  to  think  historically.  The  historic  sense 
was  innate  in  the  Greeks,  and  what  we  call 
doctrinairism  was  unknown  to  them.  It  was 
for  this  reason  that  the  theory  of  politics  was 
brought  by  them  so  early  to  such  a  height.  But 
in  contrast  to  the  splendid  bloom  of  this  branch 
of  knowledge  we  find  that  the  attainments  of 
the  Hellenes  in  the  region  of  Natural  Science 
are  quite  insignificant,  indeed  almost  childish. 
The  explanation  of  this  remarkable  fact  is  that 
the  simplest  scientific  experiments  require  in- 
struments whose  manufacture  demands  a  high 
degree  of  technical  skill.  A  second  reason  for 


xxxiv      AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

it  lies  deeper.  We  perceive  that  all  noble- 
minded  nations  are,  and  always  will  be,  idealistic 
by  nature.  We  can  recognize  this  character  in 
a  people  when  its  Art  develops  earlier  than  its 
luxury. 

The  early  and  brilliant  development  of  politi- 
cal science  among  the  Hellenes  was  followed 
by  a  long  period  of  apathy.  The  pure  historic 
sense  cannot  flourish  under  a  doctrine  which  is 
narrowing,  be  that  doctrine  theological  or 
philosophic,  and  the  whole  of  the  Middle  Ages 
was  cramped  by  its  theology.  Men  no  longer 
investigated  into  the  things  essential  to  the 
State,  but  tried  instead  to  bring  it  into  sub- 
jection to  the  Church.  Martin  Luther  broke 
its  bonds,  and  men  began  once  more  to  realize 
its  sovereignty. 

But  immediately  upon  this  followed  the  search 
for  a  Law,  especially  for  one  which  should  define 
the  ethical  limits  of  international  intercourse, 
and  this  gave  rise  to  a  philosophical  idea  of  the 
State,  the  theory  of  Natural  Law,  so-called, 
which  was  believed  to  exist  somewhere  in  the 
universe. 

The  State  was  conceived  of  as  conforming  to 
this  Law  of  Nature,  and  treated  accordingly. 

This  theory  was  first  scientifically  overthrown 
in  Germany  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  after  Herder  had  pitted  himself  against 
it.  Herder  was  unsurpassed  as  a  stimulator  of 
thought,  and  his  ideas  were  taken  up,  shaped, 
and  worked  out  by  others.  The  way  was  opened 
for  the  historical  science  of  Law  of  Eichhorn, 
Niebuhr,  and  Savigny.  By  them  Law  was 


NATURAL  LAW  xxxv 

treated  as  a  living  thing,  developing  with  the 
Nation's  development.  According  to  Savigny, 
the  State  is  the  form  of  political  life  which  a 
people  has  given  to  itself  in  the  course  of  its 
history. 

Every  living  thing  has  its  own  individuality. 
Just  as  there  is  no  such  thing  as  language  in 
itself,  but  only  various  concrete  languages,  and 
no  religion  in  the  abstract  though  positive  forms 
of  it  have  always  existed  and  always  wih1  exist, 
and  philosophic  systems  which  have  grown  out 
of  those  forms,  even  so  there  is  no  form  of  govern- 
ment derived,  as  the  teachers  of  the  Natural 
Law  would  have  it,  by  deduction  from  certain 
philosophical  phrases  and  applicable  without 
qualification  to  all  conditions.  Such  a  view  as 
this  is  absolutely  unhistorical,  for  nowhere  in 
the  whole  range  of  history  do  we  meet  with 
any  State  whose  development  has  been  along 
the  lines  laid  down  in  the  books  of  the  advocates 
of  the  Natural  Law  theory,  from  Grotius  to 
Montesquieu. 

Such  assumptions  must  be  once  and  for  all 
dismissed.  Theory  must  retire  to  the  back- 
ground, and  must  show,  if  it  really  wishes  to 
attain  positive  results,  how  the  logic  of  facts  is 
exhibited  in  the  various  existing  forms  of  State, 
which  are  even  to  some  extent  contradictory 
to  each  other.  Then  it  will  be  recognized  that 
even  barbaric  States  generally  possess  those 
forms  of  government  which  are  suited  to  their 
intellectual  powers  and  requirements. 

The  unnaturalness  of  the  Natural  Law  is 
acknowledged  now  by  most  men  of  science  ; 


xxxvi      AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

5   "9 

only  the  extremists,  the  Ultramontanes '  and 
the  extreme  Socialists,  still  hold  by  it.  The 
former  still  take  the  standpoint  of  the  Scholastics 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  and  construct  a  Natural 
Law  in  favour  of  the  Papacy.  The  sequence  of 
their  ideas  is  perfectly  logical,  although  un- 
troubled by  scientific  considerations.  But  in 
the  system  of  the  Radical  Communists,  which 
starts  by  presupposing  the  natural  equality  of 
men,  philosophical  doctrinairism  appears  naked 
and  unashamed.  Among  reasonable,  scientific, 
and  thinking  men,  however,  these  ideas  have 
practically  disappeared.  In  theory  it  is  com- 
monly acknowledged  that  science  must,  by  the 
process  of  induction  and  deduction,  trace  back 
various  phenomena  to  a  common  cause.  In 
practice,  however,  this  method  does  not  in- 
variably prevail. 

The  student  of  politics,  therefore,  must  follow 
the  methods  of  scientific  history  and  draw 
deductions  from  empirical  observations.  But 
these  methods  are  far  more  complicated  than 
the  simple  straightforward  manner  of  reaching 
conclusions  which  is  proper  to  the  Natural 
Sciences.  The  time  will  soon  come  when  the 
absurd  rivalry  between  the  moral  and  physical 
sciences  will  be  at  an  end.  The  former  have 
the  higher  and  more  ideal  office  to  perform, 
and  for  that  very  reason  must  always  remain 
inexact.  They  can  never  do  more  than  ap- 
proximate to  truth.  The  scientific  historian 
must  work  backwards  from  results,  which  are 
indeed  the  very  elements  of  his  craft.  Here 
lies  his  great  difficulty.  In  his  narrative  he 


HISTORICAL  THINKING       xxxvii 

must  make  the  later  appear  to  follow  upon  the 
earlier,  whereas  in  reality  the  process  is  reversed. 
He  is  neither  able  nor  willing  to  set  down  all 
the  events  which  have  actually  happened,  there- 
fore before  he  undertakes  the  description  of  a 
period  he  must  be  clear  in  his  own  mind  which 
of  its  occurrences  have  importance  for  posterity, 
a  meaning  for  time  to  come.  If  history  were 
an  exact  science,  the  future  of  governments 
might  stand  revealed.  But  this  can  never  be, 
for  the  riddle  of  personality  always  remains 
unsolved.  It  is  individual  men  who  make  his- 
tory, such  men  as  Luther,  Frederick  the  Great, 
or  Bismarck.  This  great  heroic  truth  will  endure 
for  ever,  and  how  it  happens  that  the  right  man 
appears  at  his  appointed  time  will  always  be 
a  mystery  to  our  mortal  minds.  The  period 
moulds  the  genius,  but  does  not  create  it.  No 
doubt  there  are  certain  ideas  at  work  in  history, 
but  the  power  of  impressing  them  ineffaceably 
upon  an  age  is  only  given  to  the  genius  of  some 
particular  man  appearing  at  a  particular  time. 

It  is  misapprehension  of  this  truth  which 
leads  to  so  many  false  conclusions,  whose  folly 
is  the  less  apparent  because  many  of  them  have 
already  become  commonplaces. 

To  take  an  example.  Certain  combinations 
of  outward  circumstances  lay  at  hand  for  Prussia. 
She  was  favoured  by  her  geographical  position, 
extending  from  East  to  West.  Moreover,  she 
had  within  her  borders  the  extremes  of  religious 
opinion.  She  was  thus  especially  fitted  to  be 
the  champion  of  spiritual  freedom  for  the  whole 
of  Germany.  One  might  therefore  look  towards 


xxxviii    AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

her  to  put  fresh  vigour  into  the  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  but  one  must  not  argue  further  that 
from  Prussia  that  new  life  must  inevitably  spring. 
That  it  did  happen  so  was  no  fore-ordained  neces- 
sity, but  due  to  the  men  of  genius  who  directed 
the  course  of  political  events.  Any  attempt  to 
base  a  system  on  a  case  of  this  sort  would 
immediately  lead  to  mistakes. 

Again.  He  who  conceives  of  the  State  as 
a  rigid  organization,  modelled  upon  a  definite 
theory,  cannot  help  concluding  that  France 
is  under  a  despotism  to-day  in  consequence  of 
the  organization  of  Napoleon  I.  A  despotic 
Government  was  created,  and  accordingly  there 
must  be  a  Despot  at  its  head.  But  in  arguing 
thus  he  forgets  the  one  essential,  the  personal 
element  in  history.  To  a  Monarchy  should 
appertain  a  princely  House,  which  has  grown 
together  with  the  nation  through  the  course 
of  their  common  life.  Only  such  a  ruling  family 
as  this  is  able  to  rise  superior  to  parties.  After 
the  Revolution  France  was  left  with  no  Dynasty 
which  could  take  this  position.  The  spectacle 
was  at  once  presented,  therefore,  of  a  Monarchy 
seeking  a  Monarch  and  unable  to  find  one. 

It  is  because  we  so  easily  forget  the  incalcul- 
able force  of  personality  that  it  is  so  very  difficult 
to  systematize  the  facts  of  history.  There  is 
no  word  which  the  historian  should  use  so 
cautiously  as  the  word  "  necessity."  Doctrin- 
airism  is  for  him  the  worst  of  errors.  He  must 
never  twist  the  facts  of  history  to  suit  his  own 
theories.  The  number  of  its  laws  that  we  are 
in  a  position  to  lay  down  is  very  limited,  and 


FREE  WILL  AND  CHANCE       xxxix 

their  correctness  only  approximate.  The  moral 
sciences  can  only  discover  ethical  principles, 
and  the  Natural  Law,  obstinately  inflexible, 
can  never  govern  this  free  world. 

In  statistics  we  have,  to  be  sure,  one  branch 
of  political  knowledge  whose  results  can  be 
reduced  to  formulae.  They  show  that  certain 
social  peculiarities  in  the  life  of  nations  are 
marvellously  constant,  and  some  imperfectly 
trained  philosophers  have  tried  to  derive  from 
this  some  theory  of  a  natural  necessity  working 
blindly  among  men.  Thus  Quetelet  in  his  book 
Sur  rhomme  quotes  a  whole  string  of  facts — for 
instance  that  the  number  of  marriages  in  certain 
countries  remains  always  the  same  ;  that  on  an 
average  the  people  of  one  country  marry  much 
earlier  than  do  those  of  another,  and  more  at 
one  particular  age  than  earlier  or  later;  and 
that  a  remarkable  regularity  is  displayed  in  the 
statistics  of  crime ;  and  he  argued  from  this  that 
there  is  no  such  thing  as  free  will  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  word.  But  the  followers  of  this 
teaching  fail  to  detect  this  fallacy  in  it,  that 
there  is  no  incompatibility  between  free  will 
and  necessity,  but  only  between  free  will  and 
chance,  which  may  prove  the  stronger  in  the 
end.  It  is  absurd  to  place  free  will  and  neces- 
sity in  opposition  to  one  another.  It  is  exactly 
when  a  man  is  acting  most  in  obedience  to  the 
necessity  of  his  own  nature  that  he  is  most 
fully  exercising  his  capacity  for  freedom.  If  I 
do  something  which  makes  all  my  friends  ex- 
claim, "  That  is  like  him  !  Only  he  could  and 
must  act  so,"  then  I  have  behaved  in  a  way 


xl  AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

which  displays  to  their  utmost  extent  both  my 
power  of  choice  and  the  inward  compulsion. 
If  we  leave  the  moral  point  of  view  out  of  the 
question,  undoubtedly  everything  which  is  cited 
by  Quetelet  and  his  school  is  a  consequence 
of  the  outward  conditions  of  life,  limited  and 
modified  by  those  circumstances.  If  the  social 
conditions  under  which  a  nation  lives  remain 
the  same,  then  the  results  which  follow  from 
them  alone  also  continue  constant.  The  science 
of  Statistics  deals  with  such  large  averages  that 
they  are  not  disturbed  by  small  variations. 
Nevertheless  ethical  motives,  human  hopes,  and 
dreams  of  fortune  must  be  reckoned  with. 
Experience  shows  that  in  all  civilized  nations 
the  educated  classes  marry  later  than  the  others, 
for  man  does  not  mate  as  animals  do,  blindly, 
but  is  guided  by  reason  and  moral  considerations 
which  outweigh  his  natural  instincts. 

Statistics  must  not  be  allowed  to  lead  us  to 
such  false  conclusions  as  the  following,  or  to 
others  like  them — as,  for  instance,  that  in  the 
course  of  history  the  advance  of  manners  and 
morals  always  keeps  pace  with  that  of  culture. 
The  progress  is  only  in  certain  directions.  We 
can  see  it  in  the  growth  of  civilization,  but  the 
individual  human  being  does  not  become  more 
moral  as  culture  spreads.  The  polished  man 
of  the  world  and  the  savage  have  both  the  brute 
within  them. 

Nothing  is  truer  than  the  Biblical  doctrine 
of  Original  Sin,  which  is  not  to  be  uprooted  by 
civilization  to  whatever  point  you  may  bring  it. 
We  may  therefore  doubt  which  periods  are  the 


PROGRESS  xli 

most  moral,  those  when  brute  force  ruled,  or 
those  which  are  governed  by  the  more  refined 
but  more  crafty  power  of  the  purse.  In  theory 
the  ethical  standard  of  mankind  is  raised  by  the 
progress  of  culture.  We  condemn  many  things 
which  the  Ancients  thought  justifiable,  but  this 
theoretic  recognition  does  not  help  us  to  make 
any  practical  advance  towards  the  subjective 
improvement  of  the  individual,  for  man  is 
not  controlled  by  intelligence  but  by  will,  of 
which  intelligence  is  only  the  servant,  and  there- 
fore we  cannot  make  it  the  measure  of  moral 
progress.  There  are  in  the  soul  of  man  other 
qualities  besides  the  moral  ones,  imagination 
and  memory,  qualities  of  the  highest  importance, 
directly  connected  with  the  intellect,  which 
become  weaker  as  civilization  increases.  What 
is  true  of  nature  is  true  also  of  the  life  of  nations, 
that  no  new  strength  can  be  acquired  without 
corresponding  loss.  Plato  early  proclaimed  the 
invention  of  writing  to  be  a  misfortune  for  the 
human  race,  for  through  it  memory  and  imagina- 
tion suffered.  This  is  obviously  true;  and  this 
misfortune  was  increased  by  the  introduction 
of  printing  and  other  similar  inventions,  which 
we  look  at  from  only  one  point  of  view  and  call 
blessings.  For  certain  human  powers  there  is 
a  high-water  mark,  and  in  many  cases  this  has 
already  been  reached.  The  art  of  statuary 
attained  to  it  in  the  days  of  Phidias.  No  later 
sculpture  has  approached  the  Greek  in  purity 
and  strength,  neither  shall  we  ever  again  listen 
to  oratory  such  as  the  Athenians  heard.  Human 
history  does  not  march  straight  forward,  but 


xlii          AUTHOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

rather  in  spiral  lines.  Great  gains  are  paid  for 
by  heavy  losses.  f~To  suppose  that  progress  con- 
sists in  what  concerns  the  comfort  of  outward 
existence  is  so  gross  and  contemptible  an  error 
as  to  be  hardly  worth  contradiction.  The  truth 
in  the  idea  of  human  progress  can  no  more  be 
proved  by  theoretic  reasoning  than  can  the 
existence  of  God,  or  the  justice  of  an  optimistic 
or  pessimistic  conception  of  the  world.  In  these 
things  conscience  must  pronounce  the  final  judg- 
ment. Only  the  pressure  of  conscience  towards 
self-fulfilment  can  bring  home  the  conviction 
that  all  mankind  is  urged  forward  by  the  same 
pressure.  This  is  the  only  convincing  proof 
that  practical  reasoning  can  muster. 

Like  the  assertion  of  human  progress,  the 
doctrine  of  compensations  in  history  must  be 
very  carefully  handled.  There  may  be  grounds 
for  assuming  it,  but  in  innumerable  cases  our 
mortal  eyes  are  not  able  to  perceive  its  existence. 
Moreover  this  very  doubt  has  its  advantages, 
for  if  we  always  saw  the  rewards  of  our  dealings 
in  this  world  every  virtue  would  sink  to  the 
level  of  cold  calculation,  and  lose  all  the  merit 
which  lies  in  disinterested  renunciation. 

If,  after  all  this,  the  historian  finds  himself 
constantly  compelled  to  admit  that  truths  are 
only  relative,  he  finds  also  that  there  are,  fortun- 
ately, a  few  absolute  truths  on  which  he  may 
rely.  VPnus  he  can  deduce  from  political  history 
that  power  resides  in  the  State,  that  in  the  civil 
community  there  must  be  distinction  of  classes, 
etc.  And  just  as  we  have  been  able  to  find 
some  absolute  scientific  formulae,  so  also  we 


SUBJECT  HEADINGS  xliii 

have  verified  the  truth  of  some  ethical  ideas. 
Thus  mankind  discovered  very  soon  the  absolute 
ethical  standard  of  marriage.  Here  again  the 
ne  plus  ultra  has  been  reached,  and  the  divine 
command  of  Love  as  Christianity  has  pro- 
claimed it  is  perhaps  the  greatest  forward  step 
which  the  human  race  has  made  into  that  region 
where  pure  Ethics  holds  its  sway. 

The  matter  of  which  we  shall  treat  in  these 
pages  falls  naturally  into  five  principal  divisions  : 

I.  The  Nature  of  the  State  :    its  underlying 
idea  and  the  consequences  thereof. 

II.  The  social  foundations  of  the  State  :    the 
Land  and  the  People  :    Division  of  Classes  and 
diversity  of  aims. 

III.  Varieties  of  political  Constitution. 

IV.  The    State    considered   in    regard   to   its 
influence  upon  rulers  and  ruled  :    Government. 

V.  The  State  considered  in  relation  to  inter- 
national intercourse. 


FOREWORD 
TO  AMERICAN  EDITION 

So  MUCH  has  been  said  about  the  influence  of 
Professor  Heinrich  von  Treitschke  on  German 
contemporary  political  thought  that  this  transla- 
lation  of  his  "Politics"  will  be  welcome  to  Eng- 
lish and  American  readers, — more  especially,  per- 
haps, to  the  latter,  because  they  are  probably,  as 
a  rule,  less  familiar  with  the  principles  it  asserts. 
With  them  the  most  interesting  part  of  the  book 

X. 

will  be  the  first  three  chapters  and  the  last  two, 
wherein  the  author  discusses  the  idea  of  the  state, 
its  aim,  its  relation  to  the  moral  law  and  to  other 
states,  and  gives  his  ideas  of  recent  European 
history. 

Other  parts  of  the  book  are  interesting  also, 
particularly  those  that  deal  with  the  German  con- 
stitution. Here  von  Treitschke  explains  his  views 

xliii 


of  the  German  Empire  as  a  single  state,  with  the 
Emperor  as  its  sovereign,  rather  than  a  federation 
— although,  as  in  some  other  cases,  he  does  not 
carry  his  doctrines  to  their  logical  conclusion. 

But  it  is  in  the  opening  and  closing  chapters 
that  the  reader  will  see  Treitschke's  peculiar  views 
that  have  influenced  German  political  thought, 
or  in  which  that  thought  has  found  its  expression. 
The  disciples  of  a  political  thinker  habitually  carry 
his  doctrines  farther  than  the  master  himself;  and 
this  is  the  case  with  von  Treitschke.  His  theories 
have  limitations  imposed  by  common  sense.  His 
state  must  to  some  extent  observe  a  moral  code 
independent  of  itself.  Nevertheless  in  these  chap- 
ters he  expounds  very  forcibly  his  fundamental 
doctrine  that  the  end  of  the  state  is  power.  From 
this  he  draws  many  startling  conclusions;  and  his 
disciples  have  drawn  even  more. 

(Signed)     A.  LAWRENCE  LOWELL, 

President,  Harvard  University, 


xliv 


FIRST  BOOK 
THE  NATURE  OF  THE  STATE 


VOL.  I 


THE  STATE  IDEA 

THE   State  is  the  people,   legally  united  as  an 
independent  entity.     By  the  word  "  people  "  we 
understand    briefly    a   number    of   families    per- 
manently  living   side   by   side.     This   definition 
implies  that  the  State  is  primordial  and  necessary, 
that  it  is  as  enduring  as  history,   and  no  less  I 
essential    to    mankind    than    speech.      History, 
however,  begins  for  us  with  the  art  of  writing ; 
earlier  than  this  men's  conscious  recollection  of 
the   past   cannot   be   reckoned   with.     Therefore 
everything  which  lies  beyond  this  limit  is  rightly 
judged  to  be  prehistoric.     We,  on  the  other  hand, 
must  deal  here  with  man  as  an  historical  being, 
and    we    can    only    say    that    creative    political  I 
genius  is  inherent  in  him,  and  that  the  State,  / 
like    him,    subsists    from    the    beginning.     The 
attempt   to   present   it   as    something   artificial, 
following  upon  a  natural  condition,   has  fallen 
completely  into  discredit.     We  lack  all  historical 
knowledge  of  a   nation  without   a  constitution. 
Wherever  Europeans  have  penetrated  they  have 
found    some   form    of   State    organization,    rude 
though  it  may  have  been.     This  recognition  of 
the   primordial   character   of  the   State   is   very 


4  THE  STATE  IDEA 

widespread  at  the  present  day,  but  was  in  fact 
discovered  in  the  eighteenth  century.  Eichhorn, 
Niebuhr,  and  Savigny  were  the  first  to  show  that 
the  State_Js__ihe_^ojistituted  people.  It  was 
indeed  a  familiar  fact  to  the  Ancients  in  their 
great  and  simple  Age.  For  them  the  State  was 
a  divinely  appointed  order,  the  origins  of  which 
were  not  subject  to  inquiry.  The  constitutional 
doctrines  of  the  Philosophers  were  in  complete 
accord  with  the  naivete  of  the  popular  beliefs. 
For  them  the  citizen  was  in  his  very  nature  no 
more  than  a  fragment  of  the  State  ;  it  therefore 
followed  that  the  whole  must  have  been  anterior 
to  the  parts.  This  massive  conception  of  the 
State  as  a  whole,  and  its  citizens  its  parts,  can 
of  course  form  no  standard  for  us  moderns ; 
we  say  that  a  man  belongs  not  only  to  this  one 
community,  but  rather  that  he  is  essentially 
capable  of  forming  part  of  many,  without  identi- 
fying his  whole  personality  with  any  one  of 
them. 

Not  till  the  decline  of  their  commonwealth, 
when  doubts  of  the  soundness  of  the  existing 
order  began  to  arise,  did  the  Ancients  abandon 
their  time-honoured  conception.  In  a  passage 
of  the  Annals  (iii.  26),  which  by  no  means  repre- 
sents the  characteristic  spirit  of  Rome,  Tacitus, 
that  typical  figure  of  the  age  of  Roman  Decline, 
declares  that  men  originally  lived  in  a  condition 
of  innocence,  without  legal  institutions.  Then 
force  supervened,  and  thus  the  necessity  for  the 
State  arose. 

When  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor,  the  ancient 
and  visible  pillars  of  the  mediaeval  civitas 


STATE  AND  NATURAL  LAW  5 

Dei,  had  lost  their  authority  by  Luther's  act, 
political  speculators  aimed  above  all  at  tracing 
authority  back  to  some  source  superior  to  the 
will  of  the  rulers.  They  sought  after  a  Natural 
Law,  whose  sanctions  were  to  be  read  among 
the  stars.  To  provide  a  basis  for  this  theory  it 
had  to  be  assumed  that  the  State  was  a  creation 
of  human  caprice  and  was  preceded  by  a  natural 
condition  in  which  there  was  no  State.  More- 
over, the  arbitrary  methods  of  government  in 
the  eighteenth  century  were  intolerable  to  free 
spirits,  and  led  them  to  conclude  that  this 
condition  of  things  was  unnatural ;  the  idealism 
of  this  century,  the  mighty  impulse  towards 
the  emancipation  of  individuality,  co-operated 
to  promote  the  notion  of  a  natural  condition 
anterior  to  the  State.  The  Jesuits,  moreover, 
assiduously  elaborated  this  doctrine.  Since  the 
civitas  Dei  no  longer  existed  in  fact,  fresh 
justification  must  be  found  for  it  in  reason,  and 
thus  the  temporal  State  was  called  a  realm  of 
evil  and  of  lust,  morally  unsanctioned,  and  only 
acceptable  to  God  when  it  proffered  to  the 
Church  the  support  of  the  secular  arm.  The 
remarkable  book  of  the  Jesuit  Taparelli  presents 
this  ancient  doctrine  in  all  its  crudity,  and  yet 
dates  only  from  about  the  year  1860. 

Thus  the  Jesuits  and  the  champions  of  Natural 
Law  agree  at  all  events  in  regarding  the  State 
as  something  not  inherently  necessary.  Once 
the  borders  of  reality  had  been  overstepped 
fancy  had  free  play.  Hobbes  relegated  the 
bellum  omnium  contra  omnes  to  the  origin  of 
human  development.  Rousseau,  on  the  other 


6  THE  STATE  IDEA 

hand,  who  amongst  the  so-called  philosophers 
of  the  eighteenth  century  was  undoubtedly  both 
the  most  unpolitically  minded  and  the  greatest 
lyricist,  has  denned  the  Natural  State  in  accord- 
ance with  this  his  lyrical  temperament.  Human 
existence  was  imagined  in  its  beginnings  as  in- 
conceivably innocent  and  blissful,  so  that  the 
question  must  arise,  How  could  it  be  induced  by 
a  contract  to  emerge  from  this  Paradise  into  a 
world  of  constraint  ? 

If  we  probe  this  conception  of  a  State-contract 
more  closely,  the  historical  fact  which  we  have 
already  perceived  is  seen  to  be  irrefutable — that 
all  human  communities  which  we  know  of  have 
enjoyed  some  form  of  political  constitution, 
however  primitive  it  may  have  been.  The 
isolated  man  is  not  permanently  conceivable ; 
he  must  have  a  mate,  if  only  for  the  sake  of 
propagation.  Let  us  assume  what  after  all  is 
possible,  and  appears  to  be  supported  by  the 
latest  ethnographical  researches  —  the  descent 
of  mankind  from  a  primeval  couple  ;  then  the 
aboriginal  family  must  be  allowed  to  be  the 
original  State,  for  already  we  discover  in  the 
family  the  political  principle  of  subordination. 
The  father  is  the  Chief ;  he  wields  the  authority. 
Homer  thus  describes  the  Cyclopes  as  constituted 
only  in  families,  and  not  as  a  State.  There  each 
chief  pronounces  judgment  within  his  own 
family,  upon  wife  and  child.  On  such  matters, 
of  course,  no  absolutely  decisive  verdict  can  be 
uttered.  The  greatest  riddles  of  History  lie  at 
its  beginning  and  its  end.  How  is  it  possible, 
under  such  conditions,  for  men  to  bind  themselves 


THE  STATE  PRIMORDIAL  7 

by  a  contract  ?  The  answer  is  that  it  can  only 
be  done  where  a  State  exists ;  where  it  does 
not,  there  can  be  no  contract.  The  strength  of  i 
the  State  is  founded  solely  upon  positive  Rights. 
Its  aim  is  to  endow  certain  expressions  of  the 
will  with  the  binding  force  of  agreements.  If, 
then,  we  regard  as  the  cradle  of  the  State  a 
contract  whose  validity  is  derived  from  the  State 
itself,  we  are  obviously  putting  the  cart  before 
the  horse. 

We  cannot  found  the  State  upon  a  contract 
which  in  its  turn  can  only  be  conceived  within 
that  State. 

Moreover,  we  must  take  into  consideration 
that  the  idea  of  stateless  humanity  is  not  only 
without  historical  warrant,  but  also  contradicts 
the  general  laws  of  reason.  If  the  State  were 
a  machine — as  Justus  Moser  still  took  it  to  be 
— artificially  created  and  developed — it  might 
equally  well  not  have  arisen  at  all.  We  can 
imagine  humanity  without  a  number  of  important 
attributes ;  but  humanity  without  government 
is  simply  unthinkable,  for  it  would  then  be 
hum^nitv_jwrU^iitjreason.  (Man  is  driven  by  his 
political  instinct  to  construct  a  constitution  as 
inevitably  as  he  constructs  a  language. 

"Why  cannot  apes  speak?"  asked  Blumen- 
bach  nearly  a  hundred  years  ago,  and  himself 
supplied  the  apt  reply,  "  Because  they  have 
nothing  to  say."  Speech  is  the  expression  of 
reason ;  unreasoning  creatures  cannot  speak.  It 
is  one  of  Wilhelm  Humboldt's  finest  sayings 
that  man  must  have  been  already  man  in  order 
to  have  invented  language.  In  like  manner 


8  THE  STATE  IDEA 

/    political  capacity  is  one  of  those  fundamental 
gifts  without  which  we  should  not  be  men  at 

^all. 

The  human  race  was  once  for  all  created  with 
certain  innate  qualities  amongst  which  speech 
and  political  genius  must  undoubtedly  be  counted. 
Aristotle  says  truly  that  man  is  <£u<ret,  that  is 
to  say  in  his  very  nature  and  essence  a  £<woz> 
KOSTIKOV.  A  being  who  feels  no  need  for  a 
constitution,  he  proceeds,  must  either  be  a  god, 
and  thus  superior  to  man,  or  a  beast,  and  his 
inferior. 

How  these  gifts  have  been  implanted  in  man 
from  the  beginning  is  nothing  less  than  the 
Divine  secret,  which  Natural  Science  has  never 
yet  fathomed.  The  body  is  indeed  the  instru- 
ment through  which  the  spirit  works,  but  it 
is  not  identical  with  the  spirit.  Conscientious 
science  must  halt  here  and  humbly  admit  its 
limitations,  and  history  cannot  be  conceived  at 
all  without  postulating  a  creation. 

The  innate  gregariousness  of  the  savage,  how- 
ever, does  not  embrace  mankind  as  a  whole. 
The  general  love  of  his  fellows  is  unknown  to 
him,  and  the  gregarious  instinct  is  balanced  by 
a  desire  to  repel  the  unknown.  More  closely 
examined,  the  wish  for  companionship  is  thus 
perceived  to  be  merely  a  tendency  to  form  into 
groups  conditioned  by  blood  relationships.  It 
may  be  assumed  that  in  primitive  societies  the 
family  is  an  extension  of  the  tribe.  Such  tribes 
confront  the  stranger  (aAA,oT/Ho<?  <£«9)  with  sus- 
picion. It  is  well  known  that  "  hostis "  and 
"  hospes  "  were  originally  synonymous. 


MAN  AS  "ZHON  nOAITIKON"  9 

The  assertion  that  mankind  in  the  beginning 
looked  upon  itself  as  one,  is  the  opposite  of  the 
truth.  Humanity  at  the  first  cannot  be  other- 
wise conceived  than  as  constituted  in  small 
groups ;  that  is  the  primitive  form  of  small  State. 

In  classical  antiquity  every  people  held  itself 
to  be  the  chosen  race.  Only  isolated  thinkers 
had  grasped  the  idea  of  humanity  as  a  whole  ; 
Christianity  alone  made  it  universal,  and  even 
to-day  it  has  to  be  assimilated  through  doctrine 
and  education.  Undoubtedly  even  at  present 
a  man  feels  himself  primarily  a  German  or  a 
Frenchman,  and  only  in  the  second  place  as  a 
man  in  the  wider  sense.  This  is  stamped  upon 
every  page  of  history.  It  is  then  both  historically 
and  physiologically  untrue  that  human  beings 
enter  upon  existence  first  as  men,  and  after- 
wards as  compatriots.  It  was  the  teaching  of 
Christ  which  first  brought  home  to  them  that 
all  men  are  brothers.  They  are  dissimilar  in 
their  concrete  peculiarities,  alike  only  in  being 
created  in  God's  image.  In  the  actual  circum- 
stances of  their  lives  they  are  thoroughly  un- 
like. This  is  clearly  perceived  when  we  reflect 
that  a  man  does  not  even  remain  identical 
with  himself  during  his  own  life ;  the  adult 
thinks  differently  from  the  youth,  and  takes  a 
different  standpoint.  If  we  pursue  this  thought 
further  it  works  like  a  deadly  poison  upon  the 
theory  of  Radicals  who  speak  of  the  natural 
equality  of  men.  Rather  must  all  political 
thinking  postulate  their  natural  inequality,  for 
only  thus  is  the  subordination  of  some  groups 
to  others  to  be  explained. 


10  THE  STATE  IDEA 

If,  then,  political  capacity  is  innate  in  man,  and 
is  to  be  further  developed,  it  is  quite  inaccurate 
to  call  the  State  a  necessary  evil.  We  have  to 
deal  with  it  as  a  lofty  necessity  of  Nature. 
Even  as  the  possibility  of  building  up  a  civiliza- 
tion is  dependent  upon  the  limitation  of  our 
powers  combined  with  the  gift  of  reason,  so  also 
the  State  depends  upon  our  inability  to  live 
alone.  This  Aristotle  has  already  demonstrated. 
The  State,  says  he,  arose  in  order  to  make  life 
possible  ;  it  endured  to  make  good  life  possible. 

This  natural  necessity  of  a  constituted  order 
is  further  displayed  by  the  fact  that  the  political 
institutions  of  a  people,  broadly  speaking,  appear 
to  be  the  external  forms  which  are  the  inevitable 
outcome  of  its  inner  life.  Just  as  its  language 
is  not  the  product  of  caprice  but  the  immediate 
expression  of  its  most  deep-rooted  attitude 
towards  the  world,  so  also  its  political  institu- 
tions regarded  as  a  whole,  and  the  whole 
spirit  of  its  jurisprudence,  are  the  symbols  of 
its  political  genius  and  of  the  outside  destinies 
which  have  helped  to  shape  the  gifts  which 
Nature  bestowed. 

We  must,  however,  guard  against  the  abuse  of 
this    parallel   between   speech -construction   and 
State-construction.     The   great  historical  jurists 
have  often  erred  in  this  respect.     They  have  too 
often  failed  to  see  that  the  conscious  will  co-\ 
operates   in  the   building  up  of  a  State  in  far  j 
greater   measure   than   in   the    formation    of    a^ 
language.     The  life  of  the  latter  is  much  more 
naive,    direct,    and    natural    than    that    of   the 
former.     Every  single  person  who  lets  his  tongue 


THE  CONSCIOUS  WILL  IN  HISTORY  11 

wag  contributes  unconsciously  and  imperceptibly 
to  its  development. 

In  the  State,  however,  especially  when  it 
has  become  highly  civilized,  the  influence  of 
conscious  will  is  indispensable,  and  every 
people  reaches  a  stage  at  which  a  standard 
of  justice,  not  necessarily  desired  by  itself,  is 
found  to  exist.  Here  it  is  important  to  take  ( 
a  wide  view,  and  when  we  do  so  we  find  we 
can  regard  the  political  history  of  a  nation  as 
the  necessary  consequence  of  its  characteristic 
disposition  as  well  as  of  its  international  status 
and  destiny.  Schiller  says,  "  The  world's 
history  is  the  world's  verdict."  It  is  a  true 
saying,  but  it  must  not  be  interpreted  in  too 
crudely  material  a  fashion,  for  it  often  happens 
that  the  law  of  retribution  seems  to  be  in  abey- 
ance, at  least  over  short  periods,  and  many  a 
crime  goes  unexpiated.  The  life  of  nations  is 
counted  by  centuries,  and  judgment  can  only  be 
pronounced  when  some  definite  stage  in  their 
history  is  relatively  concluded.  If  we  take 
particular  instances  numerous  riddles  appear 
which  we  are  unable  to  solve.  If  it  had  been 
said  of  the  Italians  in  1858,  or  in  1868  of  the 
Germans,  that  they  had  got  what  they  deserved, 
it  would  have  been  proved  false  at  once  ;  but 
in  the  course  of  the  world's  history  a  Divine 
ordinance  is  perceptible.  In  Austria  to-day  the 
German  population  groans  under  their  fathers' 
sins ;  the  whole  country  was  evangelized,  but 
the  Reformation  was  choked  by  the  brutal 
force  of  arms,  not  by  superior  spiritual  power. 
A  people  must  above  all  things  have  the  grit 


12  THE  STATE  IDEA 

to  maintain  firmly  what  it  has  recognized  as 
right  and  true.  Thus  far  it  is  true  to  say  that 
the  Germans  of  Austria  have  received  their 
deserts,  for  they  failed  to  maintain  the  principles 
of  Protestantism  with  the  same  energy  as  the 
Germans  of  the  North. 

France  always  fluctuates  between  bigotry  and 
a  false  Liberalism.  When  Louis  XIV.  revoked 
the  Edict  bf  Nantes  and  exiled  the  Huguenots 
he  deprived  the  French  of  the  power  of  remaining 
both  God-fearing  and  free.  The  Huguenot  per- 
secutions are  still  bearing  their  evil  fruits.  The 
saying  "  the  world's  history  is  the  world's  verdict  " 
is  hard  to  understand  precisely  because  he  who 
executes  the  sentence  is  himself  always  a  litigant 
in  the  cause.  No  people  was  ever  more  justly 
annihilated  than  the  Poles,  and  yet  in  considering 
this  event  no  one  will  feel  the  emotions  which  a 
tragedy  by  a  great  artist  would  inspire,  for  the 
nations  which  consummated  this  annihilation 
were  themselves  neither  innocent  nor  impartial. 
Moreover,  there  is  the  law  of  numbers  which  must 
be  given  its  due  even  in  political  life.  I  We  may 
say  with  certainty  that  the  evolution  of  the 
State  is,  broadly  speaking,  nothing  but  the 
necessary  outward  form  which  the  inner  life  of 
/  a  people  bestows  upon  itself,  and  that  peoples 
/  attain  to  that  form  of  government  which  their 
I  moral  capacity  enables  them  to  reach.  Nothing 
can  be  more  inverted  than  the  opinion  that 
constitutional  laws  were  artificially  evolved  in 
opposition  to  the  conception  of  a  Natural  Law. 
Ultramontanes  and  Jacobins  both  start  with  the 
assumption  that  the  legislation  of  a  modern 


PERMANENCE  OF  STATES  13 

State  is  the  work  of  sinful  man.  They  thus  dis- 
play their  total  lack  of  reverence  for  the  objec- 
tively revealed  Will  of  God,  as  unfolded  in  the 
life  of  the  State. 

When  we  assert  the  evolution  of  the  State  to 
be  something  inherently  necessary,  we  do  not 
thereby  deny  the  power  of  genius  or  of  creative 
Will  in  history.  For  it  is  of  the  essence  of  political 
genius  to  be  national.  There  has  never  been  an 
example  of  the  contrary.  The  summit  of  historical 
fame  was  never  attained  by  Wallenstein  because 
he  was  never  a  national  hero,  but  a  Czech  who 
played  the  German  for  the  sake  of  expediency. 
He  was,  like  Napoleon,  a  splendid  Adventurer 
of  history.  The  truly  great  maker  of  history 
always  stands  upon  a  national  basis.  This 
applies  equally  to  men  of  letters.  He  only  is  a 
great  writer  who  so  writes  that  all  his  country- 
men respond,  "  Thus  it  must  be.  Thus  we  all 
feel," — who  is  in  fact  a  microcosm  of  his  nation. 

If  we  have  grasped  that  the  State  is  the 
people  legally  constituted  we  thereby  imply  that 
it  aims  at  establishing  a  permanent  tradition 
throughout  the  Ages.  A  people  does  not  only 
comprise  the  individuals  living  side  by  side,  but 
also  the  successive  generations  of  the  same  stock. 
This  is  one  of  the  truths  which  Materialists 
dismiss  as  a  mystical  doctrine,  and  yet  it  is  an 
obvious  truth.  Only  the  continuity  of  human 
history  makes  man  a  tyov  m-oKniKov'.  He  alone 
stands  upon  the  achievements  of  his  forebears, 
and  deliberately  continues  their  work  in  order 
to  transmit  it  more  perfect  to  his  children  and 
children's  children.  Only  a  creature  like  man, 


14  THE  STATE  IDEA 

needing  aid  and  endowed  with  reason,  can  have  a 
history,  and  it  is  one  of  the  ineptitudes  of  the 
Materialists   to   speak  of  animal   States.     It  is 
just  a  play  upon  words  to  talk  of  a  bee  State. 
Beasts  merely  reproduce  unconsciously  what  has 
been  from  all  time,  and  none  but  human  beings  can 
possess  a  form  of  government  which  is  calculated 
to  endure.     There  never  was  a  form  of  Constitu- 
tion without  a  law  of  inheritance.     The  rational 
basis  for  this  is  obvious,  for  by  far  the  largest  part 
of  a  nation's  wealth  was  not  created  by  the  con- 
temporary generation.     The  continuous  legalized 
intention  of  the  past,  exemplified  in  the  law  of 
inheritance,  must  remain  a  factor  in  the  distri- 
bution   of    property    amongst    posterity.     In    a 
nation's  continuity  with  bygone  generations  lies 
the  specific  dignity  of  the  State.     It  is  conse- 
quently a  contradiction  to  say  that  a  distribution 
of  property  should  be  regulated  by  the  deserts 
of  the  existing  generation.     Who  would  respect 
the  banners  of  a  State  if  the  power  of  memory 
had  fled?     There  are   cases   when  the  shadows 
of  the  past  are  invoked  against  the  perverted 
will    of   the    present,    and    prove    more    potent. 
To-day  in  Alsace  we  appeal  from  the  distorted 
opinions    of    the    Francophobes    to    Geiler    von 
Kaisersberg  and  expect  to  see  his  spirit  revive 
again.     No^ne_wJbo-does-net-re€ognize  the  con- 
tinued action  ofjhe_^a^jugon_the_preseat  can 
ever    undgr_stand_the^  ^nature   and   necessity    of 
War.     Gibbon  calls  Patriotism  "  the  living  sense 
of  my  own  interest  in  society  " ;  but  if  we  simply 
look  upon  the  State  as  intended  to  secure  life 
and  property  to  the  individual,  how  comes  it 


THE  PERSONALITY  OF  THE  STATE  15 

that  the  individual  will  also  sacrifice  life  and 
property  to  the  State  ?  It  is  a  false  conclusion 
that  wars  are  waged  for  -  the^  sake  of  -m  a,t eri  al 
advantage.  Modern  wars  are  not  fought  for 
the  sake^of  booty.  Here  the  high  moral  ideal  of 
national  honour  is  a  factor  handed  down  from 
one  generation  to  another,  enshrining  something 
positively  sacred,  and  compelling  the  individual 
to  sacrifice  himself  to  it.  This  ideal  is  above 
all  price  and  cannot  be  reduced  to  pounds, 
shillings,  and  pence.  Kant  says,  "  Where  a 
price  can  be  paid,  an  equivalent  can  be  sub- 
stituted. It  is  that  which  is  above  price  and 
which  consequently  admits  of  no  equivalent,  that 
possesses  real  value."  Genuine  patriotism  is 
the  consciousness  of  co-operating  with  the  body- 
politic,  of  being  rooted  in  ancestral  achievements 
and  of  transmitting  them  to  descendants.  Fichte 
has  finely  said,  "  Individual  man  sees  in  his] 
country  the  realisation  of  his  earthly  immortality. '11 
This  involves  that  the  State  has  a  personality,  i 
primarily  in  the  juridicalT  and  seconcjly  in  the  I 
politico-moral  sense.  Every  man  who  is  able  to 
exercise  his  will  in  law  has  a  legal  personality. 
Now  it  is  quite  clear  that  the  State  possesses  this 
deliberate  will ;  nay  more,  that  it  has  the  juridical 
personality  in  the  most  complete  sense.  In 
State  treaties  it  is  the  will  of  the  State  which  is 
expressed,  not  the  personal  desires  of  the  in- 
dividuals who  conclude  them,  and  the  treaty  is 
binding  as  long  as  the  contracting  State  exists. 
When  a  State  is  incapable  of  enforcing  its  will, 
or  of  maintaining  law  and  order  at  home  and 
prestige  abroad,  it  becomes  an  anomaly  and  falls 


16  THE  STATE  IDEA 

a  prey  either  to  anarchy  or  a  foreign  enemy. 
The  State  therefore  must  have  the  most  emphatic 
will  that  can  be  imagined.;  Roman  Law  was  not 
fortunate  in  its  development  of  the  conception 
of  legal  personality,  for  in  spite  of  their  mar- 
vellous legal  acuteness  the  Romans  lacked  the 
talent  for  philosophical  speculation,  and  this  is 
most  disastrously  displayed  in  their  doctrine  of 
legal  personality.  Roman  Law  assumes  that  a 
person  in  the  legal  sense  must  be  merely  an  in- 
dividual citizen. 

That  is  crude  materialism.  Rather  should 
all  associations  possessed  of  legal  will  be  con- 
sidered as  legal  persons.  ,Now  it  was  laid  down 
by  the  Romans,  who  also  felt  this  imperfection, 
that  the  State  should  attribute  this  juridical 
personality  to  monasteries,  churches,  etc.,  to 
enable  them  to  transact  legal  business,  and  to 
stand  in  legal  relationship  with  individuals. 
Thus  the  preposterous  assertion  is  made  that  a 
human  being  has  a  legal  personality  because  he 
has  two  legs,  while  the  State  has  to  acquire  it, 
not  having  it  by  nature.  But  the  will  of  the 
State  Js  not  fictitious.  It  is  the  most  real  of  all. 
Moreover,  what  is  the  meaning  of  attributing  to 
the  State  a  personality  which  is  not  inherent 
in  it  ?  The  aim  of  knowledge  is  truth.  Know- 
ledge must  not  invent  facts  but  must  state  them. 
A  legal  fiction  is  therefore  not  scientific.  It 
is  not  scientific  for  me  to  pretend,  when  the  State 
fixes  a  prescriptive  period  for  certain  offences, 
that  no  offence  has  been  committed,  for  there 
has  actually  been  one,  and  the  State  acts  thus 
on  grounds  of  expediency  only.  How  is  it 


THE  PERSONALITY  OF  THE  STATE  17 

possible,  in  treating  of  the  fundamental  fact  of 
all  constitutional  and  political  life,  to  assert, 
and  to  act  upon,  this  legal  fiction,  that  the  great 
collective  person,  the  State  —  the  most  supremely 
real  person,  in  the  literal  sense  of  the  word,  that 
exists  —  is  first  of  all  obliged  to  endow  itself  with 
a  personality  ?  How  can  we  deny  this  attribute 
to  the  very 


As  our  Germanic  public  life  was  always  very 
rich  in  all  manner  of  corporations,  our  German 
jurisprudence  was  the  first  to  abandon  the  theory 
of  Roman  Law  which  regarded  the  conception 
of  personality  as  bound  up  with  the  individual, 
and  it  defined  legal  personality  by  competence 
to  act  in  law.  In  this  way  the  dictum  becomes 
applicable  to  the  State  as  well,  for  the  State  is 
the  people's  collective  will.  This  does  not  imply 
that  it  is  the  mere  mechanical  total  of  all  in- 
dividual wills,  for  the  individual  is  able  to  belong 
to  several  corporate  bodies  at  the  same  time. 
Rousseau  has  aptly  said,  in  one  of  the  few  main- 
tainable passages  of  his  Contrat  Social,  "  La 
volonte  generale  n'est  pas  la  volonte  de  tous." 

The  State,  then,  has  from  all  time  been  a  legal 
person.  It  appears  to  be  so  still  more  clearly 
in  the  historico-  moral  sense.  States  must  be 
concjeiy^d__as_thg_  great  collectiyja  personalities 
Of  hi£Jg|gr3_JhVioTfYiighly  p.fl.pfl.ble  of  Jrtf^rrn^  re- 
sponsibility^ and  blame.  We  may  even  speak 
of  their  legaLguilti  and  still  more  accurately  of 
their  individuality.  Even  as  certain  people 
have  certain  traits,  which  they  cannot  alter 
however  much  they  try,  so  also  the  State  has 
characteristics  which  cannot  be  obliterated. 

VOL.  i  c 


18  THE  STATE  IDEA 

Pindar's  warning  words  apply  as  much  to  the 
State  as  to  the  individual  :  "  Pawn  all  thy 
goods  to  one,  and  debt  will  overtake  thee." 

We  cannot  imagine  the  Roman  State  humane, 
or  encouraging  Art  and  Science.  It  would  be 
an  implicit  contradiction.  Who  cannot  discern, 
in  the  course  of  German  history,  that  excess  of 
individual  strength  and  violence  whose  centri- 
fugal tendencies  have  made  it  so  hard  for  us  to 
establish  a  central  authority  ?  The  State  would 
no  longer  be  what  it  has  been  and  is,  did  it  not 
stand  visibly  girt  about  with  armed  might. 
Sallust  said  truly  that  there  is  nothing  more 
dangerous  for  a  State  founded  by  arms  than  to 
discard  this  essential  principle  of  its  strength. 

If,  then,  we  regard  the  State  as  the  great 
collective  personality,  it  is  obviously  misleading 
to  look  upon  it  as  an  organism,  as  many  theorists 
do.  This  conception  had  a  certain  justification 
as  against  the  mechanical  view  which  prevailed 
earlier.  In  order  to  emphasize  the  doctrine  that 
the  State  develops  naturally,  as  an  automatic 
product  of  the  people's  will,  it  became  customary 
to  speak  of  it  as  a  natural  organism.  But  it  is 
^dangerous  to  import  the  terminology  of  one 
sciejiG^4iilux^ajQjother.  Besides,  the  nature  of  an 
organism  has  become  so  problematical  to  the 
Natural  Scientists  themselves  that  Helmholtz  once 
told  me  that  he  no  longer  dared  to  define  the 
term.  The  boundary  between  organic  and  in- 
organic life  has  begun  to  fluctuate.  Above  all, 
the  phrase  does  not  in  any  sense  express  the 
nature  of  the  State.  There  are  countless 
organisms  without  conscious  will,  but  will  is  the 


MULTIPLICITY  OF  STATES  19 

State's  essence.  The  talk  of  organic  develop- 
ment in  the  body  politic  has  too  often  served  as 
the  excuse  for  indolence.  Every  one  who  had 
no  will  to  will,  contented  himself  with  the  dictum 
that  these  things  would  "  develop  organically." 
We  must  not  eliminate  will,  that  most  precious 


(Treat  the  State  as  a  person,  and  the  necessary 
and  rational  multiplicity  of  States  follows.  Just 
as  in  individual  life  the  ego  implies  the  existence 
ofthenon-ego,  so  it  does  in  the  State.  The  State 
Is  powej)  precisely  in  order  to  assert  itself  as 
against  other  equally  independent  powers.  War 
and  the  administration  of  justice-axe-the  chief 


tasks  of  jyen^the-  most—  barbaric  -States.  But 
these  tasks  are  only  conceivable  where  a  plurality 
of  States  are  found  existing  side  by  side.  Thus  the 
idea  of  one  universal  empire  is  odious  —  the  ideal 
of  a  State  co-extensive  with  humanity  is  no  ideal 
at  all.  In  a  single  State  the  whole  range  of 
culture  could  never  be  fully  spanned  ;  no  single 
people  could  unite  the  virtues  of  aristocracy  and 
democracy.  All  nations,  like  all  individuals,  have 
their  limitations,  but  it  is  exactly  in  the  abun- 
dance of  these  limited  qualities  that  the  genius  of 
humanity  is  exhibited.  The  rays  of  the  Divine 
light  are  manifested,  broken  by  countless  facets 
among  the  separate  peoples,  each  one  exhibiting 
another  picture  and  another  idea  of  the  whole. 
Every  people  has  a  right  to  believe  that  certain 
attributes  of  the  Divine  reason  are  exhibited 
in  it  to  their  fullest  perfection.  No  people  ever 
attains  to  national  consciousness  without  ovei- 

i 

rating  itself.     The  Germans  are  always  in  danger 


20  THE  STATE  IDEA 

of  enervating  their  nationality  through  possessing 
f  top  little  of  this  rugged  pride.  The  average 
German  has  very  little  political  pride ;  but  even 
our  Philistines  generally  revel  in  the  intellectual 
boast  of  the  freedom  and  universality  of  the 
German  spirit,  and  this  is  well,  for  such  a  senti- 
ment is  necessary  if  a  people  is  to  maintain  and 
assert  itself. 

Since  in  so  many  nations  the  race  becomes 
exhausted,  and  since  various  types  of  national 
culture  exist  side  by  side,  single  peoples  can  refresh 
themselves  from  the  sources  of  other  countries' 
intellectual  vigour  after  a  barren  period  of  their 
own,  as  the  Germans  did  from  the  French  and 
English  after  the  Thirty  Years'  War.  The  daily 
life  of  nations  is  founded  upon  mutual  give  and 
take,  and  since  Christianity  has  brought  this 
fact  to  universal  recognition  we  may  lay  down 
that  modern  civilizations  will  not  perish  in  the 
same  sense  as  those  of  the  ancient  world,  which 
lacked  this  knowledge.  But  it  is  no  mere  kindly 
interchange  which  takes  place ;  the  supreme 
need  is  to  preserve  what  has  been  won.  Historical 
greatness  depends  less  on  the  first  discovery  or 
invention  than  on  forming  and  keeping.  The 
terrible  saying,  Sic  vos  non  vobis,  is  once  more 
vindicated.  How  tragic  is  the  fate  of  Spain, 
which  discovered  the  New  World  and  to-day  can 
show  no  trophy  of  that  mighty  civilizing  achieve- 
ment. Her  one  remaining  advantage  is  that 
Spanish  is  still  the  language  of  millions  beyond 
the  seas.  Other  nations  advanced  and  snatched 
from  the  Iberian  races  the  fruits  of  their  labour, 
first  the  Dutch  and  then  the  English.  The 


COSMOPOLITANISM  &  NATIONALITY  21 

features  of  history  are  virile,  unsuited  to  senti- 
mental or  feminine  natures.  Brave  peoples  alone 
have  an  existence,  an  evolution  or  a  future  ;  the 
weak  and  cowardly  perish,  and  perish  justly. 
The  grandeur  of  history  lies  in  the  perpetual 
conflict  ofNnations,  and  it  is  simply  foolish  to 
desire  the  suppression  of  their  rivalry.  Mankind 
has  ever  found  it  to  be  soTj  The  Kingdoms  of 
the  Diadochi  and  the  hellenized  nations  of  the 
East  were  the  natural  reaction  from  the  world- 
empire  of  Alexander.  The  extreme  one-sided- 
ness  of  the  idea  of  nationality  which  has  been 
formed  during  our  century  by  countries  big  and. 
small  is  nothing  but  the  natural  revulsion  against 
the  world -empire  of  Napoleon.  The  unhappy 
attempt  to  transform  the  multiplicity  of  Euro- 
pean life  into  the  arid  uniformity  of  universal 
sovereignty  has  produced  the  exclusive  sway 
of  nationality  as  the  dominant  political  idea. 
Cosmopolitanism  has  receded  too  far. 

These  examples  show  clearly  that  there  is  no 
prospect_  of  a  settlement  of  int£rnational_con- 
tradictions.  The  civilization  of  nations  as  well 
as  of  individuals  tends  to  specialization.  The 
subtleties  of  personal  character  assert  themselves 
proportionately  to  increase  of  culture,  and  with 
its  growth  even  the  differences  between  nations 
become  more  sharply  defined.  In  spite  of  the 
increased  facilities  of  communications  between 
different  countries,  no  blending  of  their  'peculi- 
arities has  taken  place  ;  on  the  contrary,  the 
more  delicate  distinctions  of  national  character 
are  far  more  marked  to-day  than  in  the  Middle 
Ages.  Then  the  clergy  of  Europe,  united  by 


22  THE  STATE  IDEA 

Latin  speech  and  culture,  felt  itself  to  be  one 
body,  as  against  the  several  peoples.  Before 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  the  European  chivalry 
evolved  that  peculiar  and  universally  accepted 
code  of  gallantry  and  knightly  custom  which 
bound  the  German,  English,  and  French  nobles 
so  closely  together  that  they  took  the  side  of 
their  foreign  compeers  against  the  cities  of  their 
own  country.  Further,  the  cities  were  only  too 
often  inclined  to  ally  themselves  with  strangers 
against  the  native  nobility.  In  short,  the  Middle 
Ages  present  a  greater  uniformity  of  class  feeling 
and  intellectual  standards  than  is  perceptible 
to-day.  How  profoundly  different  is  the  modern 
French  ecclesiastic  from  the  German,  even  when 
both  are  Catholics.  No  conclusion  can  be  drawn 
from  the  superficial  circumstances  of  life  and 
fashion  and  similar  things.  Since  the  classic 
literatures  of  distinctly  national  type  emerged 
from  the  old  Latin  ecclesiastical  culture  the 
individual  characteristics  of  the  nations  have 
been  strengthened  by  their  own  powers  of  literary 
expression.  The  rational  task  of  a  legally  con- 
stituted people,  conscious  of  a  destiny,  is  to 
assert  its  rank  in  the  world's  hierarchy  and  in  its 
measure  to  participate  in  the  great  civilizing 
mission  of  mankind. 

/[Further,  if  we  examine  our  definition  of  the 
State  as  "  the  people  legally  united  as  an  in- 
dependent entity,"  we  find  that  it  can  be  more 
briefly  put  thus  :  "(The  State_js  the  public  jorce 
for  Offence  and  DefenceTJ It  is,  above  all,  Power 
wEiclrlnakes  its"will  to  prevail,  it  is  not  the 
totality  of  the  people  as  Hegel  assumes  in  his 


THE  STATE  AS  POWER  23 

deification  of  it.  The  nation  is  not  entirely 
comprised  in  the  State,  but  the  State  protects 
and  embraces  the  people's  life,  regulating  its 
external  aspects  on  every  side.  It  does  not  ,. 
ask  primarily  for  opinion,  but  demands  obedience, 
and  its  laws  must  be  obeyed,  whether  willingly 
or  no. 

A  step  forward  has  been  taken  when  the  mute 
obedience  of  the  citizens  is  transformed  into  a 
rational  inward  assent,  but  it  cannot  be  said 
that  this  is  absolutely  necessary.  Powerful, 
highly -developed  Empires  have  stood  for  cen-  J 
turies  without  its  aid.  Submission  is  what  the 
State  primarily  requires  ;  it  insists  upon  acquies- 
cence ;  its  very  essence  is  the  accomplishment  of 
its  willj  The  terrible  words  fiLa  pia  (3la 
permeate  the  history  of  all  governments. 
State  which  can  no  longer  carry  out  its  purpose 
collapses  in  anarchy/?  What  a  contrast  to  the 
life  of  the  Church.  ""We  may  say  that  pow^r,  is 
the  vital  principle  of  the  State,  as  faith  is  that  of 
the  Church,  and  love  that  of  the  family.  The 
Church  is  an  essentially  spiritual  force,  having 
also  an  external  life,  but  appealing  first  of  all 
to  conscience,  insisting  above  all  upon  the 
willing  mind,  and  standing  high  in  proportion 
to  its  ability  to  give  profound  and  intense  ex- 
pression to  this  its  vital  principle.  Therefore 
it  is  said,  "  He  that  eateth  and  drinketh  un- 
worthily eateth  and  drinketh  judgment  to  him- 
self." But  if  the  State  were  to  hold  this  view, 
or,  for  instance,  to  require  from  its  soldiers  more 
than  the  fulfilment  of  their  military  duties,  it 
would  be  unbearable.  "  It  does  not  matter," 


24  THE  STATE  IDEA 


says  the  State,  "  what  you  think,  so  long  as  you 
obey."  It  is  for  this  reason  that  gentle  char- 
acters find  it  so  hard  to  understand  its  nature. 
It  may  be  said  roughly  that  the  normal  woman 
first  obtains  an  insight  into  justice  and  govern- 
ment through  men's  eyes,  just  as  the  normal 
man  has  no  natural  aptitude  for  petty  questions 
of  household  management.  This  is  easily  under- 
stood, for  undoubtedly  power  is  a  stern  idea, 
and  its  enforcement  is  here  the  highest  and  only 
aim.  For  this  reason  the  ruling  nations  are 
not  so  much  the  races  rich  in  mental  endowment, 
but  rather  those  whose  peculiar  gift  is  force  j)f 
character.  In  this  the  thoughtful  student  of 
the  world's  history  perceives  the  awful  nature 
of  justice.  The  sentimentalist  may  bewail  the 
overthrow  of  cultured  Athens  by  Sparta,  or  of 
Hellas  by  Rome,  but  the  serious  thinker  must 
recognize  its  necessity,  and  understand  why 
Florence  for  all  her  refinement  could  not  with- 
stand the  rivalry  of  Venice.  All  these  cases 
took  their  inevitable  course. 

\The  State  is  not  an  Academy  of  Arts.  If  it 
neglects  its  ^strength  in  order  to  promote  the 
idealistic  aspirations  of  man,  it  repudiates  its 
own  nature  and  perishes.  This  is  in  truth  for 
the  State  equivalent  to  the  sin  against  the  Holy 
Ghost,  for  it  is  indeed  a  mortal  error  in  the  State 
to  subordinate  itself  for  sentimental  reasons  to 
a  foreign  Power,  as  we  Germans  have  often  done 
to  England^ 

Therefore  the  power  of  ideas  in  the  life  of  the 
State  is  only  limited.  It  is  undoubtedly  very 
great,  but  ideas  by  themselves  do  not  move 


THE  STATE  AS  POWER  25 

political  forces.  If  they  are  to  influence  public 
life  effectively  they  must  find  support  in  the 
vital  economic  interests  of  the  people.  The 
ancien  regime  was  not  shattered  by  the  ideas 
of  the  French  Philosophers,  but  by  the  mutual 
interaction  of  various  classes  which  resulted 
from  the  spread  of  these  ideas. 

A  disturbance  of  social  conditions  followed ; 
a  middle  class  had  arisen  before  which  the  old 
divisions  disappeared,  and  here  the  egalitarian 
notions  of  the  Philosophers  received  support. 

Undoubtedly  the  genuine  creators  of  the 
German  Empire  were  Bismarck  and  the  Emperor 
William  ;  not  Fichte  or  Paul  Pfizer,  or  other 
pioneers.  The  great  political  thinkers  have 
their  meed  of  fame,ljDut  the  men  of  action  are 
the  real  heroes  of  history.!  In  political  life  will 
power  is  the  first  essential  of  creative  work,  and 
therefore  many  builders  of  Empire  find  no  place 
in  the  ranks  of  genius.  The  salient  characteristic 
of  the  Emperor  William  was  not  the  originality 
of  his  mind,  but  his  calm,  cool  determination,  a 
much  rarer  quality  than  is  commonly  supposed. 
Therein  lay  his  strength. 

The  State's  capacity  for  justice  and  imparti- 
ality lies  in  its  stern  and  drastic  nature  which 
touches  only  the  exterior  of  men's  lives.     As  it 
aims  only  at  forming  and  directing  the  surface 
of  human  existence,  it  can  everywhere  take  up 
an    attitude    of   indifference    towards    the    con-     \ 
flicting  schools  of  thought  in  Art,  Science,  and    \ 
Religion.     It  is  satisfied  so  long  as  they  keep 
the  peace. 

Now  if  we  imagine  the  Church  organized  like 


THE  STATE  IDEA 

the  State  we  see  at  once  why  she  could  never 
remain  impartial.  She  feels  herself  compelled 
to  combat  what  she  holds  to  be  sin  ;  she  cannot 
be  tolerant  of  it. 

[We  have  described  the  State  as  an  independent 
force.  This  pregnant  theory  of  independence 
implies  firstly  so  absolute  a  moral  supremacy 
.that  the  State  cannot  legitimately  tolerate  any 
ipower  above  its  own,  and  secondly  a  temporal 
freedom  entailing  a  variety  of  material  resources 
V  adequate  to  its  protection  against  hostile  in- 
fluences. Legal  sovereignty,  the  State's  complete 
independence  of  any  other  earthly  power,  is  so 
rooted  in  its  nature  that  it  may  be  said  to  be  its 
very  standard  and  criteridoJ 

The  State  is  born  in  a  community  whenever 
a  group  or  an  individual  has  achieved  sovereignty 
by  imposing  its  will  upon  the  whole  body. 

We  must  not  be  misled  on  this  point  by  new- 
fashioned  teaching.  Since,  like  all  federated 
legal  systems,  the  jurisprudence  of  the  German 
Empire  recognizes  certain  fictions  from  motives 
of  expediency  and  courtesy,  the  senseless  doctrine 
of  first-rate  and  second-rate  States  has  latterly 
made  its  appearance.  This  makes  it  salutary 
for  us  to  analyse  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  sove- 
reignty." It  is  typical  of  the  French  and  of  their 
constitutional  principles  that  they  have  never 
created  any  method  of  self-government,  because 
they  neither  knew  nor  wished  to  know  what  it 
meant  in  practice.  On  the  other  hand  they  have 
maintained  the  unity  of  the  State  with  spirit 
and  determination,  and  it  was  a  Frenchman  who 
found  the  proper  term  for  this  idea.  No  doubt 


THE  STATE  AS  SOVEREIGN.   .       27  <- 

^V~-   ^> 
the    Italians    had    already    at    an    earlier    date 

spoken  of  "  Sovranita,"  but  without  connecting 
the  word  with  any  very  definite  meaning.  For 
them  "  Sovrani  "  meant  persons  in  high  place, 
as  distinguished  from  those  below  them.  It 
was  first  of  all  in  France  during  the  Huguenot 
Wars,  when  the  crown  had  become  the  shuttle- 
cock of  parties,  that  Jean  Bodin  formulated  the 
dictum,  "  The  State  is  a  plurality  of  families  avec 
puissance  souveraine"  He  was  the  first  to  use 
the  expression  in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  now 
indispensable  to  us.  Now  it  is  the  right  and  the 
duty  of  learning  to  express  certain  notions  of 
universal  validity  in  the  terms  of  that  nation's 
language  in  which  they  were  first  generated. 
Therefore  the  word  "  sovereign "  is,  and  will 
remain,  characteristic  of  the  nature  of  the  State, 
since  the  temporal  power  cannot  tolerate  a  co- 
ordinated, and  still  less  a  higher  authority  in  its 
own  sphere. 

[Human  communities  do  exist  which  in  their 
own  fashion  pursue  aims  no  less  lofty  than  those 
of  the  State,  but  which  must  be  legally  subject 
to  it  in  their  outward  relations  with  the  world. 
It  is  obvious  that  contradictions  must  arise, 
and  that  two  such  authorities,  morally  but  not 
legally  equal,  must  sometimes  collide  with  each 
other.  Nor  is  it  to  be  wished  that  the  conflicts 
between  Church  and  State  should  wholly  cease, 
for  if  they  did  one  party  or  the  other  would  be 
soulless  and  dead,  like  the  Russian  Church  for 
example.  Sovereignty,  however,  which  is  the 
peculiar  attribute  of  the  State,  is  of  necessity 
supreme,  and  it  is  a  ridiculous  inconsistency 


28  THE  STATE  IDEA 

to  speak  of  a  superior  x  and  inferior  authority 
within  it.  The  truth  remains  that  the  essence 
of  the  State  consists  in  its  incompatibility  with 
any  power  over  it.  How  proudly  and  truly 
statesmanlike  is  Gustavus  Adolphus'  exclama- 
tion, "  I  recognize  no  power  over  me  but  God 
and  the  conqueror's  sword."  This  is  so  un- 
conditionally true  that  we  see  at  once  that  it 
cannot  be  the  destiny  of  mankind  to  form  a 
single  State,  but  that  the  ideal  towards  which 
we  strive  is  a  harmonious  comity  of  nations, 
who,  concluding  treaties  of  their  own  free  will, 
admit  restrictions  upon  their  sovereignty  without 
abrogating  it. 

I  For  the  notion  of  sovereignty  must  not  be 
rigid,  but  flexible  and  relative,  like  all  political 
conceptions.  Every  State,  in  treaty  making, 
will  limit  its  power  in  certain  directions  for  its 
own  sake.  States  which  conclude  treaties  with 
each  other  thereby  curtail  their  absolute  authority 
to  some  extent.  But  the  rule  still  stands,  for 
every  treaty  is  a  voluntary  curb  upon  the  power 
of  each,  and  all  international  agreements  are 
prefaced  by  the  clause  "  Rebus  sic  stantibus." 
No  State  can  pledge  its  future  to  another.  It 
vknows  no  arbiter,  and  draws  up  all  its  treaties 
with  this  implied  reservation.  This  is  supported 
by  the  axiom  that  so  long  as  international  law 
exists  all  treaties  lose  their  force  at  the  very 
moment  when  war  is  declared  between  the  con- 
tracting parties  ;  moreover,  every  sovereign  State 
has  the  undoubted  right  to  declare  war  at  its 
pleasure,  and  is  consequently  entitled  to  repudiate 
its  treaties.  Upon  this  constantly  recurring 


THE  STATE  AS  SOVEREIGN  29 

alteration    of   treaties    the    progress    of   history 
depends  ;    every  State  must  take  care  that  its\  ^__    -^ 
treaties    do    not    survive    their    effective    value»J       I) 
lest  another  Power  should  denounce  them  by  a 
declaration  of  war  ;   for  antiquated  treaties  must 
necessarily  be  denounced  and  replaced  by  others 
more  consonant  with  circumstances. 

It  is  clear  that  the  international  agreements 
which  limit  the  power  of  a  State  are  not  absolute, 
but  voluntary  self-restrictions.  Hence,  it  follows 
that  the  establishment  of  a  permanent  inter- 
national Arbitration  Court  is  incompatible  with 
the  nature  of  the  State,  which  could  at  all  events 
only  accept  the  decision  of  such  a  tribunal  in 
cases  of  second-  or  third-rate  importance.  (  When 
a  nation's  existence  is  at  stake  there  is  noVutside 
Power  whose  impartiality  can  be  trusted.  \  Were 
we  to  commit  the  folly  of  treating  the^Alsace- 
Lorraine  problem  as  an  open  question,  by  sub- 
mitting it  to  arbitration,  who  would  seriously 
believe  that  the  award  could  be  impartial  ?  It 
is,  moreover,  a  goint_ofjionour  for  a  State  to 
solve  such  dimculties~foF~TEseIfi  International 
treaties  may  indeed  become  more  frequent,  but 
a  finally  decisive  tribunal  of  the  nations  is  an 
impossibility.  The  appeal  to  arms  will  be  valid 
until  the  end  of  history,  and  therein  lies  the 
sacredness  of  war. 

However  flexible  the  conception  of  Sovereignty 
may  be  we  are  not  to  infer  from  that  any  self- 
contradiction,  but  rather  a  necessity  to  establish 
in  what  its  pith  and  kernel  consists.  Legally  it 
lies  in  the  competence  to  define  the  limits  of  its 
own  authority,  and  politically  in  the  appeal  to 


30  THE  STATE  IDEA 

l- 

arms.     An  unarmed  State,  incapable  of  drawing 
^/the   sword   when  it  sees   fit,   is   subject  to   one 
/  which  wields  the  power  of  declaring  war.      To 
/  speak  of  a  military  suzerainty  in  time  of  peace 
/   obviously  implies   a   contradictio  in  adjecto.      A 
defenceless  State  may  still  be  termed  a  Kingdom 
for  conventional  or  courtly  reasons,  but  science, 
whose  first  duty  is  accuracy,  must  boldly  declare 
that  in  point  of  fact  such  a  country  no  longer 
takes  rank  as  a  State. 

This,  then,  is  the  only  real  criterion.  The  right 
of  arms  distinguishes  the  State  from  all  other 
forms  of  corporate  life,  and  those  who  cannot 
take  up  arms  for  themselves  may  not  be  re- 
garded as  States,  but  only  as  members  of  a 
federated  constellation  of  States.  The  difference 
between  the  Prussian  Monarchy  and  the  other 
German  States  is  here  apparent,  namely,  that  the 
King  of  Prussia  himself  wields  the  supreme 
command,  and  therefore  Prussia,  unlike  the  others, 
has  not  lost  its  sovereignty. 

The  other  test  of  sovereignty  is  the  right 
to  determine  independently  the  limits  of  its 
power,  and  herein  lies  the  difference  between  a 
federation  of  States  and  a  Federal  State.  In 
the  latter  the  central  power  is  sovereign  and  can 
extend  its  competence  according  to  its  judgment, 
whereas  in  the  former,  every  individual  State 
is  sovereign.  The  various  subordinate  countries 
of  Germany  are  not  genuine  States  ;  they  must 
at  any  moment  be  prepared  to  see  a  right,  which 
they  possess  at  present,  withdrawn  by  virtue  of 
Imperial  authority.  Since  Prussia  alone  has 
enough  votes  on  the  Federal  Council  to  be  in  a 


PRUSSIA  IN  THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE  31 

position  to  prevent  an  alteration  of  the  Constitu- 
tion by  its  veto,  it  becomes  evident  that  she 
cannot  be  outvoted  on  such  decisive  questions. 
She  is  therefore,  in  this  second  respect  also,  the 
only  truly  sovereign  State  which  remains. 

In  such  matters  one  must  not  be  guided  by 
historians,  but  by  statesmen.  When  Bismarck 
once  pointed  out  to  the  Emperor  William  I.  that 
the  consent  of  the  Empire  would  not  be  forth- 
coming for  a  certain  political  step,  the  latter 
exclaimed  irritably,  "  Rubbish  !  The  Empire 
is  after  all  only  an  extension  of  Prussia."  This 
was  certainly  a  crudely  military  point  of  view, 
but  it  was  correct.  As  history  knows  of  no  case 
in  which  the  conqueror  has  not  strengthened 
his  own  organization,  so  it  has  come  to  pass  by 
means  of  treaties  that  the  might  of  Prussia  has 
been  indirectly  extended  over  the  whole  Empire  ; 
and  under  these  conditions  we  have  prospered, 
for  even  the  Kings  of  Bavaria,  Wurtemberg, 
and  Saxony  have  not  lost  but  rather  increased 
their  effective  influence  through  the  creation  of 
the  German  Empire.  They  have  had  to  abandon 
a  military  power  which  only  existed  upon  paper, 
and  which  1866  had  proved  to  be  illusory,  but 
they  have  gained  a  channel,  through  the  forma- 
tion of  the  Federal  Council,  by  which  they  can 
exercise  an  influence  on  the  collective  will  of  the 
Empire  at  large.  This  influence  is  so  consider- 
able that  the  actual  power  of  these  rulers  is  at 
present  greater  than  formerly,  since  it  depends 
on  realities  rather  than  on  titles. 

Over  and  above  these  two  essential  factors 
of  the  State's  sovereignty  there  belongs  to  the 


32  THE  STATE  IDEA 

nature  of  its  independence  what  Aristotle  called 
"  avrdp/ceia,"  i.e.  the  capacity  to  be  self-sufficing. 

''This  involves  firstly  that  it  should  consist  of  a 
large  enough  number  of  families  to  secure  the 
continuance  of  the  race,  and  secondly,  a  certain 

/"geographical  area.  A  ship  an  inch  long,  as 
Aristotle  truly  observes,  is  not  a  ship  at  all, 
because  it  is  impossible  to  row  it.  Again,  the 
State  must  possess  such  material  resources  as 
put  it  in  a  position  to  vindicate  its  theoretic 
independence  by  force  of  arms.  Here  everything 
depends  upon  the  form  of  the  community  to 
which  the  State  in  question  belongs.  One  cannot 
reckon  its  quality  by  its  mileage,  it  must  be 
judged  by  its  proportionate  strength  compared 
with  other  States.  The  City  State  of  Athens 
was  not  a  petty  State,  but  stood  in  the  first  rank 
in  the  hierarchy  of  nations  of  antiquity ;  the  same 
is  true  of  Sparta,  and  of  Florence  and  Milan  in 
the  Middle  Ages.  But  any  political  community 
not  in  a  position  to  assert  its  native  strength 
as  against  any  given  group  of  neighbours  will 
always  be  on  the  verge  of  losing  its  character- 
istics as  a  State.  This  has  always  been  the  case. 
Great  changes  in  the  art  of  war  have  destroyed 
numberless  States.  It  is  because  an  army  of 
20,000  men  can  only  be  reckoned  to-day  as  a 
weak  army  corps  that  the  small  States  of  Central 
Europe  cannot  maintain  themselves  in  the  long 
run. 

There  are,  indeed,  States  which  do  not  assert 
themselves  positively  by  virtue  of  their  own 
strength,  but  negatively  through  the  exigencies 
of  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe.  Switzerland, 


FIRST  AND  SECOND  CLASS  STATES  33 

Holland,  and  Belgium  are  cases  in  point.  They 
are  sustained  by  the  international  situation,  a 
foundation  which  is,  however,  extremely  solid, 
and  so  long  as  the  present  grouping  of  the  Powers 
continues  Switzerland  may  look  forward  to  pro- 
longed existence. 

If  we  apply  the  test  of  avrdptceia  we  perceive 
that,  as  Europe  is  now  constituted,  the  larger 
States  are  constantly  gaining  influence  in  pro- 
portion as  our  international  system  assumes  a 
more  and  more  aristocratic  complexion.  The 
time  is  not  yet  very  distant  when  the  adhesion 
or  withdrawal  of  such  States  as  Piedmont  and 
Savoy  could  actually  decide  the  fate  of  a  coalition. 
To-day  such  a  thing  would  be  impossible.  Since 
the  Seven  Years'  War  the  domination  of  the  five 
great  Powers  has  been  necessarily  evolved.  The 
big  European  questions  are  decided  within  this 
circle.  Italy  is  on  the  verge  of  being  admitted 
into  it,  but  neither  Belgium,  Sweden,  nor  Switzer- 
land have  a  voice  unless  their  interests  are  directly 
concerned. 

The  entire  development  of  European  polity 
tends  unmistakeably  to  drive  the  second-rate 
Powers  into  the  background,  and  this  raises 
issues  of  immeasurable  gravity  for  the  German 
nation,  in  the  world  outside  Europe.  Up  to  the 
present  Germany  has  always  had  too  small  a 
share  of  the  spoils  in  the  partition  of  non-European 
territories  among  the  Powers  of  Europe,  and  yet 
our  existence  as  a  State  of  the  first  rank  is  vitally 
affected  by  the  question  whether  we  can  become 
a  power  beyond  the  seas.  If  not,  there  re- 
mains the  appalling  prospect  of  England  and 

VOL.  I  D 


34  THE  STATE  IDEA 

Russia  dividing  the  world  between  them,  and  in 
such  a  case  it  is  hard  to  say  whether  the  Russian 
knout  or  the  English  money  bags  would  be  the 
worst  alternative. 

On  close  examination  then,  it  becomes  clear 
that  if  the  State  is  power,  only  that  State  which 
has  power  realizes  its  own  idea,  and  this  accounts 
for  the  undeniably  ridiculous  element  which  we 
discern  in  the  existence  of  a  small  State.  Weak- 
ness is  not  itself  ridiculous,  except  when  mas- 
querading as  strength.  In  small  States  that 
puling  spirit  is  hatched,  which  judges  the  State 
by  the  taxes  it  levies,  and  does  not  perceive  that 
if  the  State  may  not  enclose  and  repress  like  an 
egg-shell,  neither  can  it  protect.  Such  thinkers 
fail  to  understand  that  the  moral  benefits  for 
which  we  are  indebted  to  the  State  are  above  all 
price.  It  is  by  generating  this  form  of  material- 
ism that  small  States  have  so  deleterious  an  effect 
upon  their  citizens. 

Moreover,  they  are  totally  lacking  in  that 
['capacity  for  justice  which  characterises  their 
greater  neighbours.  Any  person  who  has  plenty 
of  relations  and  is  not  a  perfect  fool  is  soon  pro- 
vided for  in  a  small  country,  while  in  a  large  one, 
although  justice  tends  to  become  stereotyped, 
it  is  not  possible  to  be  so  much  influenced  by 
personal  and  local  circumstances  as  in  the 
narrower  sphere.  French  centralization  is  an 
alarming  example.  The  incurable  nuisance  of 
our  examinations  is  unluckily  of  Prussian  origin, 
for  a  country  with  hundreds  of  Gymnasien 
cannot  give  a  free  hand  to  the  teachers,  and  with 
our  uncontrolled  freedom  of  domicile  and  frequent 


ADVANTAGES  OF  LARGE  STATES 

change  of  employees  it  will  be  hard  to  find  a 
better  method  of  selection  for  the  mass  of  Govern- 
ment posts  which  have  to  be  filled  than  that 
afforded  by  the  routine  of  examinations,  which 
have  verily  become  the  curse  of  Germany.  Red 
tape  is  an  inevitable  evil  in  the  administration 
of  big  States,  but  it  may  be  sensibly  diminished 
by  the  increased  autonomy  of  Provinces  and 

Communes. 

2i£. 
Everything    considered,    therefore,    we    reach 

the  conclusion  that  the  large  State  is  the  nobler 
type.  This  is  more  especially  true  of  its  funda-  /. 
mental  functions  such  as  wielding  the  sword  in 
defence  of  the  hearth  and  of  justice.  Both  are 
better  protected  by  a  large  State  than  a  small 
one.  The  latter  cannot  wage  war  with  any 
prospect  of  success.  There  is,  however,  nothing 
mechanical  in  the  administration  of  justice,  it 
must  be  constantly  modified  by  the  daily  practice 
of  the  Courts,  which  is  nourished  by  experience 
of  life  as  well  as  by  the  science  of  law,  and  it  is 
only  when  the  practical  experience  of  numberless 
Law  Courts  is  continuously  accumulating  that 
the  administration  of  Justice  can  be  really  effec- 
tive. There  neither  is  nor  ever  can  be  a  Swiss 
jurisprudence ;  French,  German,  Italian  law  exists 
in  Switzerland,  but  a  national  code  can  never  be 
evolved  ;  Swiss  jurists  continue  to  develop  our 
German  law. 

The  economic  superiority  of  big  countries  is 
patent.     A  splendid   security   springs   from  the    -3 
mere  largeness  of  their  scale.     They  can  over- 
come economic  crises  far  more  easily.     Famine, 
for  instance,   can   hardly   attack   every   part   of 


36  THE  STATE  IDEA 

them  at  once,  and  only  in  them  can  that  truly 
national  pride  arise  which  is  a  sign  of  the  moral 
stamina  of  a  people.  Their  citizens'  outlook 
upon  the  world  will  be  freer  and  greater.  The 
command  of  the  sea  more  especially  promotes  it. 
The  poet's  saying  is  true  indeed  that  "  wide 
horizons  liberate  the  mind."  The  time  may 
come  when  no  State  will  be  counted  great  unless 
it  can  boast  of  territories  beyond  the  seas. 

Another  essential  for  the  State  is  a  capital  city 
to  form  a  pivot  for  its  culture.  No  great  nation 
can  endure  for  long  without  a  centre  in  which 
its  political,  intellectual,  and  material  life  is 
concentrated,  and  its  people  can  feel  themselves 
united.  London,  Paris,  Rome,  Madrid,  Stock- 
holm, Copenhagen  are  the  towns  where  the 
political  life  of  the  respective  countries  has 
culminated.  Such  capitals  are  necessary,  their 
sins  and  their  crimes  notwithstanding,  but  it 
was  not  until  the  nineteenth  century  that  we 
Germans  possessed  such  a  city. 

Examining  closely,  we  find  that  culture  in 
general,  and  in  the  widest  sense  of  the  word, 
matures  more  happily  in  the  broader  conditions 
of  powerful  countries  than  within  the  narrow 
limits  of  a  little  Sta£eT\  When  Holland  was 
the  predominant  naval  Power,  Sir  William 
Temple,  in  his  book  upon  the  United  Provinces, 
asserted  that  in  a  small  State  there  must  be  some 
hidden  quality  favourable  to  maritime  commerce. 
A  no  less  meaningless  generalization  is  apparent 
in  the  favourite  German  theory  that  the  peculi- 
arities of  our  culture  arise  from  our  system  of 
petty  States.  It  must  be  obvious  that  the 


THE  STATE  IN  RELATION  TO  ART    37 

material  resources  favourable  to  Art  and  Science 
are  more  abundant  in  a  large  State ;  and  if  we 
inquire  of  history  whether  at  any  time  the 
fairest  fruit  of  human  culture  has  ripened  in  a 
genuine  petty  State,  the  answer  must  be  that 
in  the  normal  course  of  a  people's  development 
the  zenith  of  its  political  power  coincides  with 
that  of  its  literary  excellence.  In  this  England 
affords  us  an  enviable  example.  Chaucer,  the 
poet  of  the  Canterbury  Pilgrimage,  is  contem- 
poraneous with  the  Black  Prince  and  the  other 
heroic  conquerors  of  France.  Then  follows 
another  era  of  political  power  under  Elizabeth, 
and  of  literary  splendour  culminating  in  Shake- 
speare. Later,  side  by  side  with  Cromwell,  we 
find  the  no  less  unique  figure  of  the  poet  Milton. 
The  contemporaries  of  the  War  of  the  Spanish 
Succession  are  Addison  and  the  prose  writers, 
who  gave  to  modern  English  literature  its  peculiar 
characteristics,  and  directed  it  towards  the  novel 
of  manners  and  the  study  of  realism  in  fiction. 
During  the  struggle  with  the  French  Revolution, 
England  produced  Walter  Scott  and  Byron  as 
well  as  Nelson.  It  is  apparent  from  all  this 
that  the  development  has  been  a  remarkably 
happy  one. 

Such  good  fortune,  however,  falls  to  the  lot 
of  few  nations.  The  incalculable  individual  forces 
in  the  history  of  Art  and  Science  have  a  very 
robust  life  of  their  own,  and  so  long  as  they  have 
something  to  say  they  express  it  boldly,  recking 
little  of  the  State's  attitude  towards  them. 
The  State  may  build  universities  and  academies, 
but  it  must  leave  the  cultivation  of  Arts  and 


38  THE  STATE  IDEA 

Sciences  to  the  spirit  which  presides  over  these 
foundations.  In  periods  of  political  decay  Italy 
has  produced  masterpieces  in  all  the  realms  of  Art, 
so  we  must  not  argue  from,  but  rather  guard 
ourselves  against,  the  great  delusion  that  United 
Germany  must  henceforward  enter  upon  a  period 
of  literary  greatness.  Some  national  conflicts 
absorb  so  much  of  a  people's  nervous  energy 
that  an  intellectual  exhaustion  is  almost  un- 
avoidable. It  was  with  the  Italians  as  with 
us ;  their  unity  was  achieved  with  the  same 
suddenness,  and  where  shall  we  find  great  cham- 
pions of  Art  and  Literature  in  the  epoch  of 
Cavour  ?  So  much  of  our  national  strength 
was  expended  in  the  throes  of  our  struggle  for 
unity  that  the  nation  needs  time  to  recoup. 

We  must  guard  against  pedantic  theorizing 
from  single  instances,  but  in  taking  a  com- 
prehensive survey  of  history  we  see  that  all  the 
true  masterpieces  of  Poetry  and  Art  have  origin- 
ated in  the  atmosphere  which  belongs  to  great 
nationalities.  The  cosmopolitan  relations  of 
Venice  and  haughty  Florence  were  so  world- 
wide that  the  ordinary  Philistinism  of  a  petty 
State  was  out  of  the  question  with  regard  to 
them.  Their  citizens  had  a  pride  in  their  own 
destinies  which  recalls  the  temper  of  ancient 
Athens.  The  poet  and  the  artist  require  a 
great  people  to  respond  to  their  genius,  for  when 
did  a  small  nation  ever  generate  a  great  work 
of  Art  ?  The  Lusiads  belong  to  a  date  when 
Portugal  had  discovered  half  the  world.  Thor- 
waldsen  was  no  Dane  ;  he  was  born  on  board 
a  ship  bound  for  Denmark  from  Iceland,  and 


THE  STATE  IN  RELATION  TO  ART    39 

he  went  in  early  life  to  Rome.  Nothing  in  his 
works  discovers  a  trace  of  Danish  spirit.  He 
was  a  modern  Hellene,  and  when  questioned 
about  his  birthday,  he  answered,  "I  do  not 
know  it ;  it  was  on  March  8th,  1797,  that  I  first 
saw  Rome." 

It  is  always  the  rule  that  the  true  classics 
are  brought  into  being  with  the  subconscious 
assent  of  a  great  nation,  the  one  notable  excep- 
tion being  the  German  literature  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  At  that  time  the  very  pettiest  of  the 
petty  States  were  for  a  short  while  centres  of 
culture. 

No  doubt  great  Prussians  like  Kant  and 
Herder  contributed  towards  this  result,  but, 
broadly  speaking,  the  impression  is  that  in  the 
eighteenth  century  Prussia  was  still  the  Sparta 
of  Germany,  while  its  Athens  was  to  be  sought 
in  the  smaller  States.  This  condition  of  things 
only  ended  with  the  foundation  of  the  Berlin 
University. 

The  facts  are  undeniable,  but  the  question 
is  whether  the  life  of  the  little  principalities 
promoted  our  literature,  or  whether  its  influence 
was  merely  negative.  What  had  Goethe  and 
Schiller  in  common  with  the  spirit  of  Weimar 
and  Eisenach  ?  It  is  a  confusion  of  thought 
to  assert  that  these  great  men  were  reared  and 
inspired  by  Saxe- Weimar,  which  no  doubt 
afforded  them  material  protection  and  security, 
but  certainly  contributed  nothing  to  their  per- 
sonality. The  little  Courts  neither  produced 
nor  educated  our  men  of  letters.  It  was  they, 
on  the  contrary,  who  educated  the  Courts,  till 


40  THE  STATE  IDEA 

then  dominated  by  French  manners.  At  last 
a  new  world  of  ideas  burst  upon  our  people 
(the  nation  who,  after  the  Italians,  are  the  most 
idealistic  in  Europe)  and  asserted  its  right  under 
the  most  unfavourable  conditions.  Was  not 
Lessing  compelled  to  do  lip  service  to  many  a 
fetish  and  convention,  and  do  we  not  feel  in 
Goethe's  Tasso  how  often  the  poet  has  inwardly 
struggled  with  cramping  circumstances  for  which 
he  was  too  great  ? 

Even  to-day  one  cannot  look  without  vexa- 
tion at  the  fine  twin  statues  of  Goethe  and 
Schiller,  standing  in  a  bare  and  narrow  space 
in  the  town  of  Weimar,  in  front  of  an  ugly 
yellow  barrack,  which  one  learns  is  dubbed 
the  National  Theatre.  The  handful  of  Chamber- 
lains and  Bedchamber  Women  of  the  Court  of 
Weimar  were  not  an  audience  from  which  a 
great  poet  could  derive  inspiration.  It  was 
in  spite  of  provincialism  then  that  our  classic 
authors  achieved  their  mighty  work,  because 
in  all  the  narrowness  of  their  environment, 
and  surrounded  as  they  were  by  poverty  and 
Philistinism,  they  knew  themselves  to  be  repre- 
sentatives of  a  great  people  with  a  glorious 
past.  With  the  exception  of  Kant,  all  our  great 
writers  wandered  from  home,  yearning  to 
belong  to  greater  Germany.  We  may  maintain, 
then,  the  broad  principle  that  large  States  are 
more  adapted  than  small  ones  to  promote  the 
development  of  intellectual  culture. 

[We  come  now  to  consider  the  last  point 
which  arises  out  of  our  definition  of  the  State 
as  the  people  legally  united  as  an  independent 


THE  STATE  AND  SOCIETY  41 

entityTj  Rightly  to  understand  this  proposition 
we  must  tackle  the  conception  of  civil  society. 
That  society  is  the  whole  range  of  the  conditions 
of  mutual  interdependence  which  are  implied  in 
the  natural  inequality  of  man  and  the  unequal 
division  of  property  and  attainments ;  which 
are  daily  reshaped  by  human  intercourse  into 
unending  manifestations  which  include  family 
relations,  economic  conditions,  and  class  rivalries, 
to  say  nothing  of  all  the  groupings  which  spring 
from  ecclesiastical,  artistic,  and  scientific  life. 
Among  all  these  the  economic  conditions  are  of 
the  chief  importance  to  the  State,  inasmuch 
as  they,  like  itself,  belong  to  the  sphere  of  ex- 
ternal existence,  while  religion,  art,  and  science 
lead  a  more  intimate  life,  and  therefore  are  less 
dependent  on  the  State. 

When  we  examine  more  closely  the  whole 
fabric  of  these  conditions  of  mutual  interdepend- 
ence which  we  call  society  we  find  that  under 
all  its  forms  it  tends  naturally  towards  aristo-\ 
cracy.  The  Social  Democrats  imply  in  their 
very  title  the  absurdity  of  their  aspirations. 
Just  as  the  State  pre-supposes  an  irremovable 
distinction  between  those  in  whom  authority 
is  vested  and  those  who  must  submit  to  it,  so 
also  does  the  nature  of  society  imply  differences 
of  social  standing  and  economic  condition 
amongst  its  members.  In  short,  all  social  life 
is  built  upon  class  organization.  /Wise  legisla- 
tion may  prevent  it  from  being  oppressive  and 
make  the  transition  from  class  to  class  as  easy 
as  possible,  but  no  power  on  earth  will  ever  be 
able  to  substitute  a  new  and  artificial  organiza- 


42  THE  STATE  IDEA 

tion  of  society  for  the  distinctions  between  its 
groups  which  have  arisen  naturally  and  auto- 
matically. 

^It  is  a  fundamental  rule  of  human  nature  that 
the  largest  portion  of  the  energy  of  the  human 
race  must  be  consumed  in  supplying  the  primary 
necessities  of  existence.  The  chief  aim  of  a 
savage's  life  is  to  make  that  life  secure,  and 
mankind  is  by  nature  so  frail  and  needy  that 
the  immense  majority  of  men,  even  on  the 
higher  levels  of  culture  must  always  and  every- 
where devote  themselves  to  bread- winning  and 
yT^Qie  material  cares  of  life.  ^  To  put  it  simply  :  \ 
*  the  masses  must  for  ever  remain  the  masses./ 
There  would  be  no  culture  without  kitchen- 
maids. 

Obviously  education  could  never  thrive  if 
there  was  nobody  to  do  the  rough  work.  Millions 
must  plough  and  forge  and  dig  in  order  that  a 
few  thousands  may  write  and  paint  and  study. 

It  sounds  harsh,  but  it  is  true  for  all  time,  and 
whining  and  complaining  can  never  alter  i€J 
Moreover  the  rmt.p.ry  fl.ga.inst.  it  does  not  spring 
from  loy_e  of  humanity  but  from  the_jniaj£rialism 
and  jnodern  conceit  of_education.  It  is  pro- 
foundly untrue  to  regard  education  as  the 
essential  factor  in  history,  or  as  the  rock  on 
which  human  happiness  is  founded.  Would  it 
not  be  monstrous  to  maintain  that  women  are 
less  happy  than  men  ?  Does  the  superior  learn- 
ing of  the  savant  place  him  on  a  higher  plane 
than  the  labourer  ?  Personally  I  am  not  imbued 
with  this  arrogance  of  learning,  and  truly  great 
natures  have  never  been  tainted  with  it.  I  have 


HAPPINESS  AND  WEALTH  43 

always  felt  a  deep  respect  for  the  homely  virtues 
of  the  poor.  /Happiness  is  not  to  be  sought 
in  intellectual  attainments,  but  in  the  hidden 
treasures  of  the  heart,  in  the  strength  of  love  and 
of  an  easy  conscience,  which  are  accessible  to 
the  humble  as  well  as  to  the  great^  Goethe  has 
often  proclaimed  that  it  is  the  moral  forces 
which  distinguish  human  beings  from  other 
creatures  : 

Edel  sei  der  Mensch, 

Hiilfreich  und  gut, 

Denn  das  allein 

Unterscheidet  ihn 

Von  alien  Wesen, 

Die  wir  kennen. 

A  man  must  be  noble,  kind  and  good  at  need,  for  that 
alone  raises  him  above  all  other  beings  that  we  know  of. 


rain  he  says,  "  High  thinking  is  not  vital." 

is  precisely  in  the  differentiation  of  classes 
that  the  moral  wealth  of  mankind  is  exhibited. 
The  virtues  of  wealth  stand  side  by  side  with 
those  of  poverty,  with  which  we  neither  could 
nor  should  dispense,  and  which  by  their  vigour 
and  sincerity  put  to  shame  the  jaded  victim  of 
over  -  culture.  There  is  a  hearty  joy  in  living 
which  can  only  nourish  under  simple  conditions 
of  life.  Herein  we  find  a  remarkable  equalization 
of  the  apparently  cruel  classifications  of  society. 
e^ conception.  It  is  the  task 
of  go vernmenT~to  reduce~anoT  mitigate  distress, 
but  its  abolition  is  neither  possible  nor  desirable.  \> 
The  economy  of  Nature  has  here  set  definite 
limits  upon  human  endeavour,  and  on  the  other 
hand  man's  pleasure  in  life  is  so  overwhelming 


44  THE  STATE  IDEA 

that  a  healthy  race  will  increase  and  spread 
wherever  there  is  space  for  them. 

We  are  told  indeed  that  the  innumerable 
inventions  of  a  highly  developed  commercial 
community  will  make  the  supply  of  the  primary 
necessities  of  life  increasingly  easier,  but  this  is  a 
delusion,  for  needs  and  desires  lie  so  near  the 
root  of  human  nature  that  every  material  want 
which  is  satisfied  generates  another  in  endless 
succession.  When  the  first  railway  was  built  it 
was  generally  assumed  that  a  great  number  of 
horses  would  in  future  be  superfluous,  since  the 
mail-coaches  would  cease  to  run  upon  the  high- 
roads. Exactly  the  contrary  has  happened, 
because  more  horses  are  now  used  on  the  bye- 
roads  which  lead  to  the  railways  than  were 
formerly  required  in  the  whole  of  Germany. 

So  it  will  remain  true  that  the  great  mass  of 
humanity  is  always  labouring  for  the  elementary 
requirements  of  the  race.  Nor  can  any  one 
seriously  wish  that  everybody  should  receive  a 
highly  intellectual  education.  We  have  already 
overstepped  the  limits  of  prudence  in  this  direction 
and  it  would  be  a  disaster  if  still  more  Germans 
wished  to  matriculate.  The  modern  Greeks  have 
squandered  away  their  future  by  developing  two 
characteristics  with  an  appalling  one-sidedness : 
firstly  by  cultivating  an  appetite  for  information 
which  has  raised  the  number  of  students  in 
Athens  to  more  than  3000,  whose  highest  ideal 
is  that  of  the  schoolmaster,  and  secondly  by 
neglecting  their  army.  They  cannot  strike,  and 
therefore  it  has  become  doubtful  whether  they 
will  ever  possess  Constantinople,  however  much 


SOCIETY  AN  ABSTRACTION  45 

it  is  to  be  desired  that  they  should.  There  are 
then  nations  who,  to  their  great  detriment,  are 
over  -  cultured,  and  there  is  still  truth  in  the 
old  saying  about  the  hallowed  soil  of  manual 
work. 

Let  us  hear  no  clap-trap  about  the  disinherited. 
No  doubt  there  have  been  times  when  those  in 
possession  have  grossly  abused  their  power, 
but  as  a  rule  the  social  balance  is  kept. 

There  must  be  give  and  take  between  the 
higher  and  the  lower  grades  of  society,  and  in 
fact  there  is.  The  artisan  can  only  pursue  his 
craft  by  means  of  the  upper  classes,  and  it  is 
the  wholesale  contractors  who  virtually  direct 
labour. 

yFrom  all  this  a  result  emerges  which  closer 
examination  will  verify  :  that  there,  is  in  fact  no 
actual  entity  corresponding  to  the  abstract  concep- 
tion of  civil  society  which  exists  in  the  brain  of  the 
student.  Where  do  we  find  its  concrete  embodi- 
ment ?  Nowhere.  Any  one  can  see  for  himself 
that  society,  unlike  the  State,  is  intangible.  We 
know  the  State  is  a  unit,  and  not  as  a  mythical 
personality.  Society,  however,  has  no  single 
will,  and  we  have  no  duties  to  fulfil  towards  it. 
In  all  my  life  I  have  never  once  thought  of  my 
moral  obligations  towards  society,  but  I  think 
constantly  of  my  countrymen,  whom  I  seek 
to  honour  as  much  as  I  can.  Therefore,  when  a 
savant  like  Jhering  talks  of  the  ethical  aim  which 
society  is  supposed  to  have  set  itself,  he  falls 
into  a  logical  error.  Society  is  composed  of  all 
manner  of  warring  interests,  which  if  left  to 
themselves  would  soon  lead  to  a  bellum  omnium 


46  THE  STATE  IDEA 

contra  omnes.,  for  its  natural  tendency  is  towards 
conflict,  and  no  suggestion  _of  any  aspiration 
after  unity  is  to  be  found  in  it/ 

Bastiat  expresses  an  illusion  of  the  old  Free 
Trade  School  when  he  affirms  that  a  natural 
harmony  of  interests  exists  between  the  various 
groups  constituting  society  and  that  this  harmony 
could  finally  be  established  by  a  right  under- 
standing of  the  common  good,  and  that  the 
farmer  for  instance  would  have  to  recognize 
that  his  own  prosperity  depended  upon  that  of 
industry.  This  hypothesis  rests  upon  the  self- 
contradictory  conception  of  an  egotism  which 
looks  beyond  itself.  The  origin  of  this  error 
can  be  traced  back  to  the  empirical  Scottish 
philosophy  of  the  eighteenth  century  which  only 
took  into  account  the  animal  impulses  in  human 
nature  and  set  up  the  crazy  contention  that  the 
brute  in  man  would  raise  man  above  the  brute. 
Self-interest,  it  was  contended,  properly  under- 
stood, would  lead  men  to  perceive  that  their 
interests  were  inseparable  from  those  of  others, 
and  therefore  that  a  harmony  does  in  fact  exist 
.between  the  heights  and  depths  of  society.  But 

/how  can  it  be  supposed  that  men  could  arrive 
I  at  overcoming  egotism  by  egotistical  reasoning  ? 
/  The  purely  selfish  man,  be  he  never  so  acute,  can 
never  penetrate  the  tangle  of  human  affairs.  Are 
not  passion  and  stupidity  to  be  counted  among 
the  great  powers  in  all  economic  life  ?  No 
doubt  it  would  be  very  nice  if  rogues  and 
assassins  were  sensible  enough  to  see  that  they 
would  be  much  more  comfortable  if  they  did 
not  stab  or  rob  their  neighbours,  but  these 


THE  STATE  AND  SOCIETY  47 

members  of  society  are  more  lacking  in  goodwill 
than  in  perception. 

Passion  and  stupidity  after  all  only  emphasize 
a  contrast  already  existing  in  nature.  The  land- 
lord aims  at  getting  the  highest  possible  rent — 
the  tenant  at  living  as  cheaply  as  he  can.  The 
most  terrible  of  all  wars  are  those  provoked  by 
social  differences.  This  is  taught  by  the  Slave 
Wars  of  Rome,  by  the  Peasant  Wars  of  the 
Middle  Ages,  and  in  our  own  times  by  the  con- 
flagration of  the  Commune.  Social  passions  once 
let  loose  are  always  appallingly  fierce  and  foolish, 
and  no  class  can  boast  of  being  superior  to 
another  in  this  respect. 

It  is  then  clear  that  society  takes  a  thousand 
forms,     and    consequently    that    social    science 
cannot  be  separated  from  political  science.     We 
can"  indeed  treat  the  science  of  economics  as  an 
intellectual  abstraction,  but  if  we  survey  society 
with  its  struggles  and    its  groupings,   including 
those  which  are  not  economic  in  their  nature,  we 
find  ourselves  once  more  in  presence  of  the  State. 
For  that  is  the  legal  unity  which  counterbalances 
this  multiplicity  of  interests,  and  it  is  only  playing      / 
with  words  to  speak  of  political  and  social  science    1 
as  two  separate  things.     Law  and  peace  and  order  ^^ 
cannot  spring  from  the  manifold  and  eternally 
clashing  interests  of  society,  but  from  the  power 
which  stands  above  it,  armed  with  the  strength 
to  restrain  its  wild  passions.     It  is  here  that  we 
first  get  a  clear  idea  of  what  we  may  speak  of 
as  the  moral  sanctity  of  the  State.     The  State    \ 
it  is  which  brings  justice  and  mercy  into  this     \ 
struggling  world. 


48  THE  STATE  IDEA 

If  we  inspect  more  closely  the  mutual  relations 
of  State  and  society  we  find  a  continual  inter- 
action between  them,  involving  the  subtlest 
scientific  problems.  The  ideal  aim  is  that  the 
two  should  be  commensurate,  and  that  every 
living  social  force  should  find  that  place  within 
the  constituted  order  of  things,  which  its  im- 
portance demands.  But  this  ideal  can  never  be 
realized  because  society  always  lives  and  grows 
faster  than  the  State.  The  formation  of  com- 
mercial companies  must  first  have  arisen  out  of 
trade  before  the  State  can  contemplate  legisla- 
tion with  regard  to  them.  A  natural  inclination 
to  become  identified  is  discernible  both  in  the 
State  and  in  society,  but  it  can  never  be  quite 
carried  out.  Every  force  which^ arises  in  society 
struggles  to  acquire  a  corresponding  weight  in 
the  State,  and  conversely  the  State  seeks  to 
utilize  every  such  force  for  its  own  ends.  Hence 
there  is  an  unceasing  ebb  and  flow,  a  constant 
give  and  take.  The  power  of  a  newly  arisen 
class  may  long  remain  unnoticed  by  the  State, 
until  it  suddenly  becomes  apparent  that  the  social 
centre  of  gravity  has  shifted.  During  the 
eighteenth  century  the  nobility  in  France  had 
gradually  ceased  to  be  the  dominant  class,  the 
bourgeoisie  had  become  more  and  more  powerful 
through  its  wealth  and  culture,  so  that  the 
aristocracy  little  by  little  lost  its  claim  to  pre- 
eminence. But  such  processes  must  have  nearly 
run  their  course  before  the  State  can  take  cogniz- 
ance of  them  ;  and  to  discern  these  really  vital 
movements  of  society  is  one  of  the  most  difficult 
tasks  which  it  has  to  perform,  because  in  the 


THE  STATE  AND  SOCIETY  49 

constant  flux  of  daily  life  they  are  so  often  unseen 
upon  the  surface,  and  because  it  is  very  hard 
for  reflective  thought  to  penetrate  the  secret 
heart  of  the  masses.  Further  it  is  plain  that 
the  State  may  influence  society  by  organizing 
and  controlling  it,  but  can  rarely  do  so  by  creative 
effort.  By  enfranchising  the  serfs  in  1807 
Prussia  enabled  them  to  make  themselves  self- 
supporting,  but  it  is  to  their  own  energy,  and 
to  the  use  they  have  made  of  the  opportunity 
thus  afforded  them  that  we  owe  the  boon  of  our 
free  peasant  community.  Identical  legislation 
would  not  have  transformed  Russian  or  Polish 
serfs  into  the  stalwart  yeomen  which  ours  after- 
wards became.  The  State  can  only  interfere 
to  protect  or  promote. 

Further  there  is  a  natural  distinction  between 
the  social  and  the  political  conception  of  the 
State.  It  may  be  regarded  from  above  from 
the  point  of  view  of  government,  and  the  question 
asked,  "  What  safeguards  its  authority  ?  "  Lin 
pursuing  this  political  train  of  thought  the 
question  of  individual  happiness  is  relegated  to 
the  second  rank.  On  the  other  hand  the  social 
point  of  view  looks  upon  the  State  with  naive 
egotism,  and  points  clamorously  to  the  new 
social  forces  for  which  it  has  not  yet  legislated. 
Everything  which  our  century  terms  Liberalism 
tends  towards  the  social  view  of  the  State.  Were 
it  the  only  one,  were  it  not  confronted  by  a 
stern  political  conception,  the  framework  of  our 
nationality  would  simply  collapse,  and  Germany 
be  disintegrated  by  the  warring  of  innumerable 
social  groups. 

VOL.  i  E 


50  THE  STATE  IDEA 

There  are  peoples  whose  entire  existence  is 
coloured  and  shaped  by  their  relation  to  the 
State,  others  again  in  which  the  social  outlook 
predominates.  Broadly  speaking,  modern  nations 
fall  into  the  latter  category,  in  contradistinction 
to  the  politically  -  minded  communities  of  the 
ancient  world.  The  difference  between  the  two 
attitudes  is  very  marked,  even  within  a  given 
epoch,  and  it  is  very  curious  to  observe  how  the 
excess  of  either  tendency  may  ruin  a  people. 
Thus  did  the  gifted  Spanish  race  drain  its  life- 
blood  for  the  political  idea  of  the  supremacy 
of  the  Church.  We  cannot  contemplate  such 
stupendous  political  idealism  without  a  kind 
of  horror  -  stricken  admiration.  The  moral 
dignity  of  labour  was  repudiated  on  principle, 
and  thereby  the  country  was  ruined  to  such  an 
extent  that  the  catastrophe  was  instantaneous. 

In  modern  history  we  more  often  see  the 
/momentous  results  of  the  exclusively  social 
[attitude  of  mind.  The  nation  which  lives  only 
to  justify  those  social  appetites,  whose  only 
wish  is  to  grow  richer  and  to  live  more  comfort- 
ably, must  inevitably  fall  a  prey  to  the  lowest 
propensities  of  nature.  What  a  glorious  people 
were  the  Dutch  in  the  days  of  their  struggle 
against  the  power  of  Spain  !  But  scarcely  was 
their  independence  secured  before  the  corroding 
influence  of  peace  began  to  eat  into  their  hearts. 
Misfortune  is  a  tonic  to  noble  nations,  but  in 
continued  prosperity  even  they  run  the  risk  of 
enervation.  In  this  way  the  once  courageous 
race  of  Holland  have  deteriorated  physically  as 
well  as  morally  by  becoming  mere  money- 


SOCIAL  AND  POLITICAL  IDEALS      51 

grubbers.  That  is  the  Nemesis  of  a  people 
which  spends  itself  entirely  in  social  life  and 
loses  the  sense  of  its  political  greatness. 

Both  the  Italians  and  the  Germans  have  been 
under  this  same  curse.  Their  idealism  took  an 
exclusively  literary  and  artistic  form,  and  thus 
the  Italians  became  a  nation  of  dilettantes  who 
found  beauty  only  in  the  ankle  of  a  ballerina 
or  the  throat  of  a  prima-donna.  We  Germans 
have  never  known  a  more  contemptible  period 
than  the  slothful  interval  of  peace  after  the 
religious  compact  of  Augsburg.  This  instance 
plainly  proves  that  a  dead  calm  is  not  wholesome 
for  a  people.  Its  result  was  a  belated  War  of 
Religion,  which  unfortunately  inherited  none  of 
the  passions  of  the  days  of  Luther  except  their 
hatreds,  for  the  truly  idealistic  spirit  of  the 
Reformation  was  gone.  Here  the  one-sidedness 
of  the  purely  social  outlook  took  a  terrible 
revenge.  In  the  eighteenth  century  literary 
and  artistic  preoccupations  were  uppermost,  and 
not  till  then  did  our  people  gradually  begin  to 
descend  from  Heaven  to  Earth.  In  our  own 
time  the  preponderance  of  social  forces  is  be- 
ginning to  assert  itself  again  in  the  form  of  a 
slavish  observance  of  the  platitudes  of  Natural 
Science. 

(^A  certain  balance  between  political  and  social 
activity  is  the  ideal.)    A  people  generally  takes 
care  of  itself  in  this  respect,   and  at  intervals 
which  defeat  calculation  reconstitutes  itself  by 
'  war.      War   is   Politics  jjcar    e|o^V.|    Again    and  / 
again  it  has  been  proved  that   it  is  war  which  1 
turns  a  people  into  a  nation,  and  that  only  great 


52  THE  STATE  IDEA 

deeds,  wrought  in  common,  can  forge  the  indis- 
soluble links  which  bind  them  together.  But 
the  same  reinvigorating  force  which  war  from 
time  to  time  carries  with  it,  is  brought  into  daily 
life  by  a  liberal  Constitution,  and  here  it  is 
especially  noteworthy  that  local  self-govern- 
ment maintains  better  the  balance  of  social  and 
political  activity  than  a  Parliamentary  activity 
can  do.  Self-government  enlists  the  best  elements 
in  the  community  in  the  daily  service  of  the 
State,  and  is  thus  of  infinite  value.  Self- 
administered  local  bodies  prepare  the  community, 
which  would  otherwise  be  disintegrated  by  the 
egotism  of  purely  social  activities,  for  political 
work  towards  a  common  end. 

The  interaction  between  State  and  society 
is  infinitely  complex,  illogical  and  intricate. 
Human  existence  is  not  adapted  to  being  woven 
by  theorists  into  a  flawless  system.  There  are 
social  forces  which  embody  the  idea  of  beauty 
or  devote  themselves  to  the  search  for  truth, 
but  however  exalted  the  aims  of  these  social 
efforts  may  be  it  is  the  common  characteristic 
of  them  all  to  remain  unsatisfied  with  the 
attained,  and  to  be  filled  with  the  spirit  of  over- 
weening, the  TrXeovegta.  None  of  them,  not  even 
the  Church,  have  the  instinct  of  a  mathematical 
equality  in  their  conception  of  justice.  The 
State  alone  can  be  universally  and  genuinely 
just,  and  this  because  it  concerns  itself  with 
external  order  alone.  Under  primitive  conditions 
'it  frequently  happens  that  a  particular  class 
absorbs  the  governing  power  to  such  an  extent 
that  the  State  never  attains  to  the  consciousness 


THE  STATE  ABOVE  SOCIETY    53 

of  its  duty  to  stand  above  social  antagonisms. 
This  is  undoubtedly  true  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
It  was  at  a  very  late  stage  that  the  State  began 
to  realize  that  it  was  something  more  than  the 
tool  of  a  particular  class.  The  conception  of 
the  theory  of  High  Treason  is  a  symptom  of  this 
awakening.  Already  in  1352  the  idea  of  it  was 
formulated  in  England,  and  marks  the  State's 
dawning  consciousness  of  its  own  majesty.  The 
more  the  conditions  of  its  power  make  it  inde- 
pendent of  any  social  class,  the  more  capable  will 
it  be  of  meting  out  justice  to  every  one  of  them. 
All  civil  society  is,  as  we  have  seen,  aristocratic 
by  nature.  A  monarchy  as  well  as  an  aristocracy 
becomes  part  of  this  naturally  ordained  aristo- 
cratic division,  while  all  democracy  is  rooted  in  a 
contradiction  of  nature,  because  it  premises  a 
universal  equality  which  is  nowhere  actually 
existent.  It  is  not  to  be  discovered  in  any  of 
Nature's  organisms :  no  animal  is  the  exact 
replica  of  its  fellow,  and  this  rule  stands  good  in 
far  higher  degree  for  the  human  race.  Civil 
society  exhibits  the  same  inequalities,  which  the 
State  can  never  remove. 

^When  we  draw  our  conclusions  from  all  the 
foregoing  we  shall  not  follow  Hegel  in  pro- 
nouncing the  State  to  be  absolutely  the  people's 
life. 

In  the  State  he  saw  the  moral  idea  realized, 
which  is  able  to  accomplish  whatever  it  may 
desire.  Now  the  State,  as  we  have  seen,  is  not 
the  whole  of  a  nation's  life,  for  its  function  is 
only  to  surround  the  whole,  regulating  and 
protecting  it.  When  the  Hegelian  Philosophy 


54  THE  STATE  IDEA 

was  at  its  zenith,  a  number  of  gifted  men  tried 
to  make  out  that  the  State,  like  the  Lejdsithan, 
should  swallow  up  everything.  The  modern 
man  will  not  find  this  idea  easy  to  accept.  No 
Christian  could  live  for  the  State  alone,  because 
he  must  cling  fast  to  his  destiny  in  eternity. 
Out  of  this  arises  a  youthful  error  of  Richard 
Rothe's,  when,  in  his  work  on  the  history  of  the 
Christian  Church,  he  develops  the  idea  that  if 
the  State  would  in  the  future  take  over  the 
Church's  civilizing  duties,  the  two  might  amalga- 
mate. This  can  never  be,  nor  can  any  one 
seriously  wish  it.  The  State  can  only  work  by  an 
outward  compulsion  :  it  is  only  the  people  as  a 
force ;  but  in  saying  this  we  express  an  endlessly 
wide  and  great  ideal,  for  the  State  is  not  only 
the  arena  for  the  great  primitive  forces  of  human 
nature,  it  is  also  the  framework  of  all  national 
life.  In  short,  a  people  which  is  not  in  a  position 
to  create  and  maintain  under  the  wing  of  the 
State  an  external  organization  of  its  own  intel- 
lectual existence  deserves  to  perish.  The  Jewish 
race  affords  the  most  tragic  example  of  a  richly 
gifted  nation,  who  were  incapable  of  defending 
their  State,  and  are  now  scattered  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth.  Their  life  is  crippled,  for  no  man 
can  belong  to  two  nations  at  once.  The  State, 
therefore,  is  not  only  a  high  moral  good  in  itself, 
but  is  also  the  assurance  for  the  people's  en- 
durance. Only  through  it  can  their  moral 
development  be  perfected,  for  the  living  sense 
of  citizenship  inspires  the  community  in  the 
same  way  as  a  sense  of  duty  inspires  the  in- 
dividual. 


POLITICAL  ASPECT  OF  HISTORY      55 

All  historical  study,  therefore,  must  return 
finally  to  consider  the  State,  for  there  can  be  no 
Will  without  a  being  capable  of  willing,  and 
where  is  that  to  be  found  in  the  life  of  history  ? 
Where  are  the  collective  personalities  who  struggle 
with  one  another  upon  its  stage  ?  To  speak  of 
the  soul  of  a  people  is  the  error  of  the  scientist ; 
it  has  become  the  fashion,  but  it  will  vanish  like 
last  year's  snow,  for  how  is  it  possible  to  say  that 
some  decision  has,  at  some  given  moment,  been 
arrived  at  by  the  soul  of  a  people  ?  Macaulay 
was  the  first  to  assert  that  the  era  of  political 
history  was  ended,  and  its  place  taken  by  the 
history  of  civilization,  but  he  refrained  from  act- 
ing up  to  his  own  principles.  Whoever  recognizes 
that  continuity  is  the  very  essence  of  history, 
will  also  understand  that  all  history  is  primarily 
political.  The  deeds  of  a  nation  must  indeed 
be  chronicled,  statesmen  and  generals  are  the 
heroes,  scholars  and  artists  also  have  their  place, 
but  the  true  life  of  history  is  not  exhausted  by 
the  study  of  these  inspiring  figures.  The  further 
we  stray  from  the  State  the  more  do  we  lose  sight 
of  that  true  historic  life. 

Moreover,  when  our  century  claims  that  the 
study  of  social  conditions  is  a  new  thing  in  the 
writing  of  history,  it  exhibits  a  strange  self- 
conceit.  The  Father  of  History,  Herodotus, 
devotes  quite  half  his  attention  to  it.  The 
second  great  historian  of  the  Greeks,  whose 
relations  to  Herodotus  are  as  those  of  the  full- 
grown  man  to  the  simple  child,  writes  purely 
politically  and  ignores  social  history  altogether. 
Herodotus  describes  a  strange  and  mysterious 


56  THE  STATE  IDEA 

world,  unfamiliar  to  his  hearers,  but  deeply 
interesting  to  all  Hellenes.  He  had  seen  it 
with  his  own  eyes,  and  in  order  to  make  the 
events  of  Persian  and  Egyptian  history  generally 
comprehensible,  he  first  of  all  depicts  the 
ordinary  manners  and  customs  of  the  time. 
Thucydides  was  not  obliged  to  do  this,  and 
would  have  made  himself  ridiculous  by  attempt- 
ing a  detailed  description  of  Greek  society,  for 
he  was  concerned  with  contemporary  history 
played  upon  a  stage  with  which  every  one  was 
well  acquainted.  Here  we  have  a  striking  proof 
of  how  the  social  element  may  sometimes  be 
absent  from  the  representation  of  history,  but 
the  political  never  can  be.  No  historian  who 
lacks  the  political  mind  can  penetrate  to  the 
heart  of  history,  for  all  his  philological  learning 
cannot  give  him  the  political  insight  to  perceive 
how  the  ideas  of  the  age  influenced  the  State 
for  good  or  evil.  There  is  always  an  incomplete- 
ness in  those  historical  works,  which  treat  only 
of  the  mere  study  of  national  character  and 
ignore  the  State  and  the  world  of  action.  Jacob 
Burckhardt's  splendid  book,  Cultur  der  Renais- 
sance in  Italien,  is  one  of  the  finest  historical 
works  existing,  but  nevertheless  every  one  feels 
the  want  of  something  in  it,  and  that  something 
is  living  personalities.  To  understand  the  Italian 
Renaissance  at  all  it  is  first  necessary  to  under- 
stand the  blossoming  of  the  Italian  States. 

Moreover,  technical  achievement  and  inven- 
tion have  much  less  historical  importance  than 
is  nowadays  claimed  for  them.  Were  it  not  so 
we  should  have  to  revise  our  collective  judgment 


INFLUENCE  OF  SCIENCE  ON  HISTORY  57 

of  the  history  of  the  world.  In  the  whole  course 
of  that  history  we  can  hardly  find  a  people  whose 
actions  have  had  so  lasting  an  influence  as  those 
of  the  Romans,  and  yet  they  were  not  out- 
standing in  Art  or  Literature,  nor  especially 
distinguished  for  their  inventions.  Horace  and 
Virgil  wrote  Greek  verse  in  Latin,  but  we  must 
not  expect  from  them  the  originality  proper  to 
the  Greek  poets.  Yet  this  Roman  people  became, 
through  their  actions,  one  of  the  most  productive 
in  the  world's  history.  They  impregnated  the 
German  races  with  their  genius  for  State  con- 
struction, and  we  will  not  forget  that  the  Roman 
Church  owes  its  form  essentially  to  the  Roman 
State.  No  doubt  the  Romans  did  make  many 
advances  in  the  realm  of  science,  but  on  the 
whole  their  genius  here  also  lagged  behind  that 
of  the  Greeks. 

Reflection  convinces  us  that  it  is  the  first 
and  oldest  inventions  which  have  done  the  most 
for  civilization,  and  have  had  the  greatest  in- 
fluence on  the  life  of  the  nations.  Writing  was 
undoubtedly  the  most  important  of  all  human 
inventions,  for  with  it  historic  life  began.  Like- 
wise the  discovery  of  the  use  of  manure  was 
the  most  ancient  in  agriculture  and  produced 
the  greatest  effect,  for  when  the  tribes  attained 
that  knowledge  they  became  stationary,  and 
their  whole  way  of  life  was  changed.  It  is 
evident  that  these  two  ancient  discoveries  did 
more  for  the  progress  of  mankind  than  either 
printing  or  the  telegraph.  Writing  lifted  the 
human  intellect  to  a  new  level,  but  printing 
had  no  such  effect. 


58  THE  STATE  IDEA 

A  summary  of  all  this  leads  us  again  to  the 
definition  of  history  as  a  representation  of  the 
res  gestae  and  of  the  statesmen  who  brought  them 
to  pass.  The  historian  must  have  unhampered 
political  insight  in  order  to  understand  the 
gifts  and  specific  peculiarities  of  each  of  those 
men.  Every  great  statesman  is  characterized 
by  will-power,  strong  ambition,  and  a  passionate 
^desire  for  success.  He  is  no  statesman  if  he  takes 
no  joy  in  results.  Frederick  William  IV.  had 
the  artistic  nature.  He  was  satisfied  to  revel 
in  some  fine  political  theory,  and  its  practical 
working  out  interested  him  less.  No  doubt 
the  statesman  also  must  possess  imagination, 
but  it  is  imagination  dealing  with  reality,  and 
differently  constructed  from  the  artist's.  And 
in  spite  of  his  delight  in  mere  success,  in  spite 
of  his  recklessness  in  the  choice  of  men  and 
methods,  in  spite  of  all  the  harshness  and  brutality 
which  his  nature  must  acquire,  the  true  statesman 
displays  a  disinterestedness  which  cannot  fail 
to  impress. 

"  May  my  reputation  be  shattered  and  my 
name  forgotten,"  exclaimed  Cavour,  "  but  let 
Italy  become  a  nation." 

At  the  present  time  there  are  two  tendencies 
]^hich  work  against  this  political  conception  of 
nistory.  One  is  the  over-subtle,  artistic,  literary 
/trend  of  thought,  introduced  by  Hermann 
Grimm.  He  finds  the  real  inwardness  of  history 
in  Art  and  Literature,  and  forgets  that  millions 
of  men  are  left  untouched  thereby.  But  a  far 
greater  danger  than  this  aesthetic  one-sidedness 
lies  in  that  modern  and  suburban  view  of  life 


THE  STATEjIDEA  59 

which    prizes    money-grubbing    above    the    pro- 
ductivity of  Art  or  even  of  the  effective  Will. 

Against  this  we  must  hold  to  the  living 
idealism  of  the  historian  which  does  not  underrate 
hard  facts,  but  rather  seeks  to  discover  through 
them  the  dominating  idea. 


II 

THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

WHEN  we  begin  to  consider  the  aim  of  the 
State  we  are  immediately  confronted  with  the 
old  vexed  question  which  has  needlessly  fretted 
both  the  learned  and  the  ignorant,  namely — 
Should  we  look  upon  it  as  a  means  towards  the 
private  ends  for  which  its  citizens  strive,  or  are 
those  citizens  means  towards  the  great  national 
ends  of  the  State  ?  The  severely  political  out- 
look of  the  ancient  world  favoured  the  second 
alternative ;  the  first  is  maintained  by  the 
modern  social  conception  of  the  State,  and  the 
eighteenth  century  believed  itself  to  have  dis- 
covered in  it  the  theory  that  the  State  should  be 
treated  only  as  an  instrument  to  promote  the 
aims  of  its  citizens. 

But,  as  Falstaff  would  say,  this  is  "a 
question  not  to  be  asked,"  for  ever  since  it  has 
|  been  considered  at  all,  it  has  been  universally 
(agreed  that  the  rights  and  duties  of  the  State 
and  its  members  are  reciprocal.  There  can  be 
no  two  opinions  on  that  point.  But  parties 
which  are  bound  together  by  mutual  obligations 
and  rights  cannot  stand  to  each  other  in  the 
relations  of  means  to  an  end,  for  means  only 

60 


SPHERE  OF  THE  STATE'S  ACTIVITY  61 

exist  to  serve  an  end,  and  there  can  be  no 
reciprocity  between  them.  The  Christian  point 
of  view  has  destroyed  the  ancient  conception  of 
the  State,  and  the  Christian  would  be  false  to 
himself  if  he  did  not  reserve  that  immortal  and 
intransitory  something,  which  we  call  conscience, 
as  his  own  private  and  peculiar  possession. 

In  one  of  his  greatest  books,  The  Foundations 
of  the  Metaphysics  of  Ethics,  Kant  logically 
develops  the  principle  that  no  human  being  may 
be  used  merely  as  an  instrument,  thereby  recog- 
nizing the  divinely  appointed  dignity  of  man. 
Conversely,  to  regard  the  State  as  nothing  but 
a  means  for  the  citizens'  ends  is  to  place  the 
subjective  aspect  too  high.  The  greatness  of 
the  State  lies  precisely  in  its  power  of  uniting 
the  past  with  the  present  and  the  future  ;  and 
consequently  no  individual  has  the  right  to  regard 
the  State  as  the  servant  of  his  own  aims  but  is 
bound  by  moral  duty  and  physical  necessity  to 
subordinate  himself  to  it,  while  the  State  lies 
under  the  obligation  to  concern  itself  with  the 
life  of  its  citizens  by  extending  to  them  its  help 
and  protection. 

When  we  conceive  the  State  as  a  personality,  \ 
we  see  clearly  that  it  must  seek  its  own  goal  within  L 
itself.     This  truth  was  first  pointed  out  at  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  by  Adam 
Muller    and  the   Romantic   School    of    political 
thinkers.     It  is  impossible  to  discover  what  the 
ultimate   aim   of  any  living  personality   should 
be,  without  putting  the  further  question,  What 
is  the  moral  task  of  that  personality  ?     Let  us 
in  the    same    way    ask  the    State   what   is   its 


62  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

appointed  work  in  the  civilized  world,  —  and, 
firstly,  what  are  the  natural  boundaries  of  its 
activity  ? 

It  then  becomes  evident  that  we  cannot  and 
must  not  attempt  to  lay  down  any  theoretic 
maximum  of  such  activity,  nor  define  the  bound- 
aries within  which  the  State  may  display  it. 
Since  the  State  is  power,  it  can  obviously  draw 
all  human  action  within  its  scope,  so  long  as 
that  action  arises  from  the  will  which  regulates 
the  outer  lives  of  men,  and  belongs  to  their 
visible  common  existence.  Historical  experience 
— examined  fairly  and  without  prejudice — teaches 
us  that  the  State  can  overshadow  practically  the 
whole  of  a  people's  life.  It  will  dominate  it  to 
the  precise  extent  in  which  it  is  in  a  position  to 
do  so.  There  have  been  States  which  have 
embraced  and  directed  it  entirely.  Communistic 
forms  of  society  do  this.  Moreover,  the  degree 
of  independence  desired  by  different  nations 
varies  very  much.  Some  only  feel  themselves 
at  ease  when  all  the  circumstances  of  their  lives 
are  guided  by  a  compelling  power  above  them. 
JA.  theocracy,  of  all  forms  of  government  the  most 
'  f  immature,  is  also  the  most  interfering.  We  know 
of  no  State  in  history  which  has  mingled  more 
with  the  life  of  its  members  than  the  remarkable 
Jesuit  State  in  Paraguay.  It  existed  for  cen- 
turies among  the  Indians,  and  they  throve  under 
its  sway.  In  this  case  Church  and  State  were 
one.  These  savages,  converted  to  the  Church 
of  Christ,  were  ruled  by  a  practical  Communism 
such  as  no  other  people  have  ever  consistently 
experienced.  The  clang  of  the  Church  bell 


SPHERE  OF  THE  STATE'S  ACTIVITY  63 

summoned  them  to  their  work,  their  food,  and 
their  slumbers.  Such  a  theocratic  omnipotence 
may  shock  us,  but  we  cannot  deny  to  this  State 
its  claim  to  the  title. 

^Theoretically,  therefore,  no  limit  can  be 
to  the  functions  of  a  State.  It  will  attempt  to 
dominate  the  outer  life  of  its  members  as  far 
as  it  is  able  to  do  so.  A  more  fruitful  subject 
for  speculation  will  be  to  fix  the  theoretic 
minimum  for  its  activity,  and  decide  what 
functions  it  must  at  the  least  fulfil  before  it  can 
be  given  the  name  of  State.  When  we  have  set 
this  minimum  we  shall  come  to  the  further 
question  of  how  far  beyond  it  the  State  may 
reasonably  extend  its  action.  We  then  see  at 
once  that  since  its  first  duty,  as  we  have  already 
said,  is  the  double  one  of  maintaining  power! 
without,  and  law  within,  its  primary  obligations  \ 
must  be  the  care  of  its  Army  and  its  Jurisprudence, 
in  order  to  protect  and  to  restrain  the  community  ' 
of  its  citizens.  The  fulfilment  of  these  two 
functions  is  attained  by  certain  material  means  ; 
therefore  some  form  of  fiscal  system  must  exist, 
even  in  the  most  primitive  of  States,  in  order  to 
provide  these  means. 

No  State  can  endure  which  can  no  longer 
fulfil  these  elementary  duties.  It  is  only  in 
abnormal  circumstances  that  we  find  any  ex- 
ception to  this  rule,  as  when  an  artificial  balance 
of  power  protects  the  smaller  States  which  can 
no  longer  protect  themselves. 

The  functions  of  the  State  in  maintaining 
its  own  internal  administration,  of  justice  are 
manifold.  It  must  firstly,  in  civil  law,  place 


64  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

(\)  ' 

the  prescribed  limit  upon  the  individual  will. 
It  will  nevertheless  proportionately  restrict  its 
own  activity  in  this  sphere,  since  no  individual  is 
compelled  to  exercise  his  own  legal  rights.  Here 
the  State  will  issue  no  direct  commands,  but 
merely  act  as  mediator,  leaving  the  carrying  out 
of  its  decrees  to  the  free  will  of  the  contracting 
parties^ 

In  civil  law  the  rule  that  purchase  supersedes 
hire  is  not  necessarily  observed  in  each  individual 
case,  but  only  when  the  parties  concerned  have 
made  no  other  arrangement,  and  the  State  only 
enforces  it  in  order  to  provide  a  fixed  legal 
standard  if  dispute  arises. 

The  interference  of  the  State  is  more  active 
in  the  domain  of  cnmiriaLla^y.  Here  it  exercises 
compulsion  in  order  to  protect  its  legal  ordinances 
against  the  invasion  of  evil  design,  and  here  it 
lays  down  what  the  rights  and  duties  of  its 
citizens  should  be.  In  sharp  contrast  with  the 
principles  of  civil  jurisprudence,  the  individual 
is  here  given  no  choice  whether  he  will  or  will 
not  act  in  full  accordance  with  the  law.  The 
principles  of  common  law  are  so  absolutely 
binding  that  they  are  synonymous  with  duty. 

The  State  decides  the  measure  of  the  cifcizeu!s 
share  injbhgj^nstjtujion.  Public  servants  have 
no  option  in  the  extent  to  which  they  will  exercise 
their  functions.  For  instance,  if  the  State  re- 
frains from  imposing  universal  suffrage  as  a  duty, 
it  does  so  only  upon  grounds  of  expediency. 
Cjhe  next  essential  function  of  the  State  is  the 
The  long  oblivion  into  which 


this    principle    had    fallen    is    a    proof   of   how 


WAR  65 

effeminate  the  science  of  government  had  be- 
come in  civilian  hands.  In  our  century  this 
sentimentality  was  dissipated  by  Clausewitz, 
but  a  one-sided  materialism  arose  in  its  place, 
after  the  fashion  of  the  Manchester  school,  seeing 
in  man  a  biped  creature,  whose  destiny  lies  in 
buying  cheap  and  selling  dear.  It  is  obvious 
that  this  idea  is  not  compatible  with  war,  and 
it  is  only  since  the  last  war  that  a  sounder  theory 
arose  of  the  State  and  its  military  power. 

Without,    war    pr>    Stf1*-*    ftnnlH    hp         All   those 

we  know  of  arose  through  war,  and  the  protection 
of  their  members  by  armed  force  remains  their 
primary  and  essential  task.  War,  therefore^ 
will  endure  to  the  end  of  history,  as  long  as  there 
is  multiplicity  of  States.  The  laws  of  human 
thought  and  of  human  nature  forbid  any  alter- 
native, neither  is  one_to  ^-wished  for.  The  blind 
worshipper  of  an  eternal  peace  falls  into  the  error 
of  isolating  the  State,  or  dreams  of  one  which  is 
universal,  which  we  have  already  seen  to  be  at 
variance  with  reason. 

Even  as  it  is  impossible  to  conceive  of  a  tribunal 
above  the  State,  which  we  have  recognized  as 
sovereign  in  its  very  essence,  so  it  is  likewise 
impossible  to  banish  the  idea  of  war  from  the 
world.  It  is  a  favourite  fashion  of  our  time  to 
instance  England  as  particularly  ready  for  peace. 
But  England  is  perpetually  at  war ;  there  is 
hardly  an  instant  in  her  recent  history  in  which 
she  has  not  been  obliged  to  be  fighting  some- 
where. The  great  strides  which  civilization 

O 

makes  against  barbarism  and  unreason  are  only 
made  actual  by  the  sword.  Between  civilized 

VOL.  I  F 


I 


66  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

\nations  also  war  is  the  form  of  litigation  by^  which 
ptates  make  their  claims  valid.  The  arguments 
brought  forward  in  these  terrible  law  suits  of 
the  nations  compel  as  no  argument  in  civil  suits 
can  ever  do.  Often  as  we  have  tried  by  theory 
to  convince  the  small  States  that  Prussia  alone 
can  be  the  leader  in  Germany,  we  had  to  produce 
the  final  proof  upon  the  battlefields  of  Bohemia 
and  the  Main. 

V       Moreover  war  is  a  uniting  as  well  as  a  dividing 

^element  among  nations ;    it  does  not  draw  them 

^together  in  enmity  only,  for  through  its  means 

they  learn  to  know  and  to  respect  each  other's 

peculiar  qualities. 

It  is  important  not  to  look  upon  war  always 
as  a  judgment  from  God.  Its  consequences  are 
evanescent ;  but  the  life  of  a  nation  is  reckoned 
by  centuries,  and  the  final  verdict  can  only  be 
pronounced  after  the  survey  of  whole  epochs. 

Such  a  State  as  Prussia  might  indeed  be 
brought  near  to  destruction  by  a  passing  phase 
of  degeneracy ;  but  being  by  the  character  of 
its  people  more  reasonable  and  more  free  than 
the  French,  it  retained  the  power  to  call  up  the 

/moral  force  within  itself,   and  so  to  regain  its 
ascendancy.     Mp^t_jm4ou%tedly-wajiJ5_Jiie_^ne  I 
rj3mejly^ar__aji_^  Social  selfishness 

and  party  hatreds  must  be  dumb  before  the  call 
of  the  State  when  its  existence  is  at  stake.  For- 
getting himself,  the  individual  must  only  re- 
member that  he  is  a  part  of  the  whole,  and  realize 
the  unimportance  of  his  own  life  compared  with 
the  common  weal. 

The  grandeur  of  war  lies  in  the  utter  annihilation 


THE  DREAM  OF  ETERNAL  PEACE     67 

of  puny  man  in  the  great  conception  of  the 
State,  and  it  brings  out  the  full  magnificence 
of  the  sacrifice  of  fellow  -  countrymen  for  one 
another.  In  war  the  chaff  is  winnowed  from 
the  wheat.  Those  who  have  lived  through  1870 
cannot  fail  to  understand  Niebuhr's  description 
of  his  feelings  in  1813,  when  he  speaks  of  how 
no  one  who  has  entered  into  the  joy  of  being 
bound  by  a  common  tie  to  all  his  compatriots, 
gentle  and  simple  alike,  can  ever  forget  how  he 
was  uplifted  by  the  love,  the  friendliness,  and 
the  strength  of  that  mutual  sentiment. 

It  is  war  which  jofft.f!rs_±he  political  idealism 
which  the  materialist  rejects.  What  a  disaster 
for  civilization  it  would  be  if  mankind  blotted 
its  heroes  from  memory.  The  heroes  of  a 
nation  are  the  figures  which  rejoice  and  inspire 
the  spirit  of  its  youth,  and  the  writers  whose 
words  ring  like  trumpet  blasts  become  the  idols 
of  our  boyhood  and  our  early  manhood.  He 
who  feels  no  answering  thrill  is  unworthy  to  bear 
arms  for  his  country.  To  appeal  from  this 
judgment  to  Christianity  would  be  sheer  per- 
versity, for  does  not  the  Bible  distinctly  say  that 
the  ruler  shall  rule  by  the  sword,  and  again  that 
greater  love  hath  no  man  than  to  lay  down  his 
life  for  his  friend  ?  To  jVryanraces,  who  are 
before  all  things  courageous,  thlTfooIIsh  preaching 
of  everlasting  peace  has  always  been  vain.  They 
have  always  been  men  enough  to  maintain  with 
the  sword  what  they  have  attained  through  the 
spirit. 

Goethe  once  said  that  the  North  Germans 
were  always  more  civilized  than  the  South 


\ 


68  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

Germans.  No  doubt  they  were,  and  a  glance  at 
the  history  of  the  Princes  of  Lower  Saxony  shows 
that  they  were  for  ever  either  attacking  or 
defending  themselves.  One-sided  as  Goethe's 
verdict  is,  it  contains  a  core  of  truth.  Our 
ancient  Empire  was  great  under  the  Saxons ; 
under  the  Swabian  and  the  Salic  Emperors  it 
declined.  Heroism,  bodily  strength,  and  chival- 
rous spirit  is  essential  to  the  character  of  a  noble 
people. 

Such  matters  must  not  be  examined  only  by 
the  light  of  the  student's  lamp.  The  historian 
who  moves  in  the  world  of  the  real  Will  dees  at 
once  that  the  demand  for  eternal  peace  is  purely 
reactionary.  He  sees  that  all  movement  and 
all  growth  would  disappear  ^with  w'Sr^and  that 
only  the  exhausted,  spiritless,  degenerate  periods 
of  history  have  toyed  with  the  idea.  Three 
such  periods  have  occurred  in  modern  history. 

The  first  was  the  dismal  time  after  the  Peace 
of  Utrecht  and  the  death  of  Louis  XIV.  The 
world  seemed  to  be  taking  breath,  but  Frederick 
the  Great  pronounced  acutely  that  this  was  a 
period  of  universal  demoralization  in  European 
politics.  The  Holy  Roman  Empire  occupied  a 
ridiculous  position,  Prussia  was  unprepared  and 
faced  with  the  problem  of  expansion  or  destruc- 
tion—  yet  these  indefinite  conditions  were  pro- 
nounced by  the  apostles  of  reason  to  be  fraught 
with  good.  The  elder  Rousseau,  the  Abbe  Castel 
de  St.  Pierre,  and  others  came  forward  and  wrote 
their  insensate  books  about  the  banishment  of 
strife. 

The  second  period,  when  the  nations  eagerly 


WAR  AND  MODERN  CIVILIZATION    69 

passed  round  the  pipe  of  peace,  began  under 
like  circumstances  after  the  Congress  of  Vienna. 
Its  treaties  were  looked  upon  as  ratio  scripta, 
and  it  was  held  to  be  right  and  reasonable  that 
two  great  nations,  the  Germans  and  the  Italians, 
should  be  cramped  for  all  eternity. 

We  are  living  in  the  third  period  to-day.  A 
great  war  seems  to  have  destroyed  idealism  in 
Germany.  Does  not  the  braying  laughter  of 
the  vulgar  echo  loud  and  shameless,  when  any 
of  those  things  which  have  made  Germany  great 
is  thrown  down  and  broken  ?  The  foundations 
of  our  ancient  and  noble  culture  are  crumbling; 
everything  which  once  made  us  an  aristocracy 
among  the  nations  is  mocked  and  trodden  under 
foot.  Certainly  this  is  a  fitting  time  to  rave  once 
more  of  everlasting  peace. 

But  it  is  not  worth  while  to  speak  further  of 
these  matters,  for  the  God  above  us  will  see  tdl 
it  that  war  shall  return  again,  a  terrible  medicinef 
for  mankind  diseased.  *-J 

Despite  all  this  it  is  not  denied  that  the  progress 
of  culture  must  make  wars,  both  shorter  and 
rarer,  for  with  every  step  it  renders  men's  lives 
more  harmonious.  Even  as  the  alternation  be- 
tween asceticism  and  sensuality  which  was  char- 
acteristic of  the  Middle  Ages  is  no  longer  natural 
to  us  to-day,  so  does  war  strike  us  as  appalling, 
because  it  involves  a  complete  break  with  our 
accustomed  conditions.  The  highly  cultured 
man  realizes  indeed  that  he  must  slay  the  an- 
tagonists whose  bravery  he  honours,  and  he 
feels  that  the  majesty  of  war  lies  in  the  absence 
of  passion  from  the  slaughter,  therefore  it  is  a 


70  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

far  greater  effort  to  him  than  to  the  savage  to 
enter  upon  such  a  conflict. 

Furthermore,  civilized  nations  suffer  far  more 
than  savages  from  the  economic  ravages  of  war, 
especially  through  the  disturbance  of  the  arti- 
ficially existing  credit  system,  which  may  have 
frightful  consequences  in  a  modern  war.  Terrible 
indeed  would  be  the  results  of  the  entrance  of 
an  invader  into  London,  where  the  threads  which 
bind  the  credit  of  millions  are  gathered  together, 
and  where  a  conqueror  as  ruthless  as  Napoleon 
might  wreak  a  havoc  of  which  we  can  form  no 
conception.  Therefore  wars  must  become  rarer 
and  shorter,  owing  to  man's  natural  horror  of 
bloodshed  as  well  as  to  the  size  and  quality  of 
modern  armies,  for  it  is  impossible  to  see  how 
the  burdens  of  a  great  war  could  long  be  borne 
under  the  present  conditions.  But  it  would  be 
false  to  conclude  that  wars  can  ever  cease. 
They  neither  can  nor  should,  so  long  as  the  State 
is  sovereign  and  stands  among  its  peers. 

There  are  then  no  two  opinions  about  the 
duty  of  the  State  to  maintain  its  own  laws  and 
protect  its  own  people.  For  this  purpose  every 
State  must  have  an  Exchequer.  The  machinery 
of  the  law,  the  upkeep  of  the  army,  and  some 
system  of  finance  are  their  first  duties.  Up  to 
this  point  no  argument  need  be  entertained,  for 
it  is  of  no  importance  to  science  whether  a  truth 
be  accepted  quietly,  or  with  wailing  and  gnashing 
of  teeth.  The  dispute  concerning  the  aims  and 
business  of  the  State  only  begins  over  the  question 
of  its  ability  and  vocation  to  assume  other  duties 
towards  the  human  race.  No  such  question  was 


THE  DUTIES  OF  THE  STATE 


admitted  into  the  political  conceptions  of  classical 
antiquity,  for  where  the  citizen  is  nothing  but 
a  member  of  the  State  the  idea  of  its  undue 
interference  with  his  concerns  does  not  arise. 
It  never  occurred  to  Aristotle  to  inquire  whether 
the  State  was  exceeding  its  prerogative  when  it 
appointed  an  official  to  superintend  feminine 
morality.  It  acted  within  its  rights,  and  he  did 
not  consider  whether  in  so  doing  it  did  damage 
to  family  life.  In  the  same  way  it  did  not  strike 
the  Ancients  as  possible  that  the  State  could 
legislate  too  much.  The  words  of  Tacitus,  in 
pessima  republica  plurimae  leges,  which  are  so 
often  and  so  willingly  quoted  in  this  context, 
simply  mean  that  when  the  morals  of  a  State 
are  bad  it  may  seek  in  vain  to  remedy  the  evil 
by  a  multitude  of  laws. 

The  modern  theory  of  individualism,  decked 
with  its  various  titles,  stands  as  the  poles  asunder 
from  these  conceptions  of  antiquity.  From  it 
the  doctrine  emanates  that  the  State  should 
content  itself  with  protection  of  life  and  property, 
and  with  wings  thus  clipped  be  pompously 
dubbed  a  Constitutional  State. 

This  teaching  is  the  legitimate  child  of  the 
old  doctrine  of  Natural  Law.  According  to  it 
the  State  can  only  exist  as  a  means  for  the  in- 
dividual's ends.  The  more  ideal  the  view  adopted 
of  human  life,  the  more  certain  does  it  seem  that 
the  State  should  content  itself  with  the  purely 
exterior  protective  functions?)  William  Hum- 
boldt  sets  forth  this  belief  in  its  most  alluring 
and  intelligent  form  in  one  of  his  early  writings, 
Suggestions  for  an  Attempt  to  define  the  Boundaries 


72  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

of  the  State's  Activity  ("  Ideen  zu  einem  Versuch 
die  Grenzen  der  Wirksamkeit  des  Staates  zu 
bestimmen  ").  The  State,  he  says,  should  defend 
the  lives  and  goods  of  its  citizens,  and  for  the 
rest  ensure  to  them  the  greatest  possible  freedom. 
Without  liberty  there  is  no  morality ;  therefore 
a  State -enforced  morality  is  worthless,  and  the 
State  must  abstain  from  interference  in  the  free 
life  of  its  members.  Such  was  Humboldt's 
opinion,  and  it  fascinated  many,  for  it  was 
redolent  of  the  spirit  of  Weimar  and  Jena — 
the  time  when  men  were  intoxicated  with  beauty, 
and  looked  upon  the  State  only  as  a  necessary 
evil.  Their  demand  was  not  so  much  for  freedom 
within  the  State,  as  for  freedom  from  it.  We 
cannot  wonder  at  this  teaching,  for  it  was  a 
product  of  the  prevailing  system  of  little  States. 
Humboldt  himself  did  not  abide  by  his  youthful 
convictions,  for  when  the  time  of  need  came  he 
too  supported  the  power  of  the  State  to  compel, 
and  proved  thereby  that  he  understood  the 
meaning  of  liberty  within  it. 

Many  years  later,  when  these  highly  idealistic 
beliefs  of  his  could  be  studied  in  their  entirety 
(1852,  in  the  seven  volumes  of  his  collected 
Works),  they  were  hailed  with  acclaim  by  a  quite 
differently  minded  generation.  Aesthetic  ideal- 
ism had  given  way  before  the  new  materialistic 
economic  teaching,  whose  only  root  is  in  the 
money-bags,  and  which  is  still  firmly  planted  in 
certain  circles.  It  too  would  fain  use  the  State 
only  as  a  means,  and  would  make  of  it  no  more 
than  a  sort  of  night-watchman  for  the  citizens' 
security.  /TBut  when  we  probe  this  theory  which 


CIVILIZATION  AND  THE  STATE       73 

has  cast  its  spell  over  so  many  distinguished 
men,  we  find  that  it  has  totally  overlooked  the 
continuity  of  history,  and  the  bond  which  unites 
the  succeeding  generations.  The  State,  as  we 
have  seen,  is  enduring ;  humanly  speaking,  it  is 
eternal.  Its  work  therefore  is  to  prepare  the 
foundations  for  the  future.  If  it  existed  only 
to  protect  the  life  and  goods  of  its  citizens  it 
would  not  dare  to  go  to  war,  for  wars  are  waged 
for  the  sake  of  honour,  and  not  for  protection  of 
property.  They  cannot  therefore  be  explained 
by  the  empty  theory  which  makes  the  State  no 
more  than  an  Insurance  Society.  Honour  is  a 
moral  postulate,  not  a  juridical  conception. 

Obviously  the  theory  oversteps  its  own  limits. 
If  the  State  is  to  make  the  law  secure,  it  must 
be  able  to  prevent,  and  must  therefore  take  steps 
to.  kill  the  brute. in  man.  Consequently  it  must 
to  some  extent  care  for  the  people's  education. 
In  1847  the  English  were  childish  enough  to  scoff 
at  the  servile  intelligence  of  the  German  nation, 
which  welcomed  the  idea  of  universal  compulsory 
education.  Yet  Macaulay,  being  a  man  of  in- 
dependent judgment,  was  convinced  that  the 
'savagery  of  the  masses  must  be  checked,  and  he 
spoke  out -for  the  enforcement  of  school  attend- 
ance, but  he  could  not  auite  throw  off  the  old 
English  habit  of  mind,  and  he  declared  that  the 
State  must  take  charge  of  the  upbringing  of  its 
citizens  if  it  wished  to  guard  itself  against  thieves 
and  robbers.  The  education  of  the  people  has 
a  higher,  nobler  task  than  the  securing  of  the 
possessions  of  individuals. 

Ahrens  and  the  followers  of  Krause  have  tried 


74  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

to  evolve  higher  functions  for  the  State  out  of 
this  theory  of  the  Constitutional  State.  But 
this  conjurer's  trick  was  not  very  successful. 
They  denned  the  State  as  a  combination  of  all 
the  institutions  which  make  for  the  perfecting  of 
the  human  race.  Hence  it  may  no  doubt  be 
proved  that  the  Constitutional  State  may  dis- 
charge all  the  duties  of  promoting  culture.  But 
all  this  is  mere  juggling  with  phrases.  It  behoves 
us  to  say  boldly  that  the  idea  of  the  Constitutional 
State  is  not  adequate  to  express  the  real  essence 
of  the  State  and  its  functions.  The  State  is  a 
moral  community  called  to  positive  labours  for 
the  improvement  of  the  human  race,  and  its 
ultimate  aim  is  to  build  up  real  national  character 
through  and  within  itself,  for  this  is  the  highest 
moral  duty  of  nations  as  well  as  individuals. 
When  we  have  taken  this  to  our  hearts  we  are 
able  to  perceive  that  the  Germans  are  far  from 
having  accomplished  these  great  national  tasks. 
National  character  is  exactly  what  they  lack  in 
comparison  with  their  neighbours,  for  their  unity 
is  so  young.  A  sure  and  certain  national  instinct 
is  not  a  universal  quality  with  us,  as  it  is  with  the 
French  people. 

We  may,  then,  shortly  call  the  State  the 
instrument  of  civilization,  and  demand  of  it 
positive  labour  for  the  economic  and  intellectual 
welfare  of  its  members.  History  shows  us  how 
the  sphere  of  the  State's  activity  widens  with 
the  growth  of  culture.  Everything  which  we 
call  Government  in  the  strict  sense  has  been 
created  through  the  progress  of  civilization.  In 
Homeric  times  the  prince  was  content  with 


COMPULSION  AND  FREEDOM         75 

pronouncing  judgment  and,  when  necessary, 
conducting  war.  Even  in  the  Middle  Ages  an 
administration  was  still  non-existent,  and  the 
State  only  concerned  itself  with  the  most  element- 
ary necessities.  Not  until  the  splendour  of  the 
Holy  Roman  Empire  was  in  German  hands  did 
German  kingship  begin  its  fuller,  richer  expan- 
sion. Then  the  growth  of  the  cities  forced  the 
State  to  adopt  new  aims  and  wider  activities. 
Experience  teaches  that  the  State  is  better 
fitted  than  any  other  corporate  body  to  take 
charge  of  the  well-being  and  civilizing  of  the 
people.  Briefly  put,  what  was  the  great  result 
of  the  Reformation  ?  The  secularization  of  great 
portions  of  the  common  life  of  men.  When 
the  State  secularized  the  larger  portion  of  the 
Church's  lands  it  also  took  over  its  accompany- 
ing public  duties,  and  when  we  reckon  how 
much  the  State  has  accomplished  for  the  people's 
culture  since  the  Reformation,  we  recognize 
that  these  duties  fall  within  its  natural  sphere. 
It  has  accomplished  more  than  the  Church 
performed  throughout  the  whole  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  But  here  again  we  must  guard  ourselves 
against  stereotyped  conventions.  Everything 
depends  on  what  kind  of  official  class  the  State 
possesses.  The  German  railway  system  would  be 
unworkable  in  England  or  America,  for  the  officials 
would  not  be  forthcoming.  Our  Swabian  com- 
patriot, Riimelin,  who  made  a  comparative  survey 
of  Germany  and  America,  pronounced  that  the 
German  administration  was  both  better  and  more 
economical,  but  that  in  a  newer  world  the  State 
cannot  have  yet  reached  that  measure  of  efficiency. 


76  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

It  savours  of  barbarism  to  regard  the  State's 
fostering  of  Art  as  a  luxury.  Art  is  as  in- 
dispensable to  men  as  their  daily  bread.  Without 
these  stirrings  of  the  spirit  we  should  cease  to 
be  a  nation,  and  the  State  is  there  to  set  before 
Art  its  great  work  for  the  nation's  monuments. 

This  expansion  of  the  State's  activity  is  not 
absolute,  however ;  rather  does  it  militate  against 
the  greater  happiness  of  mankind  that  its  opera- 
tion should  have  become  increasingly  indirect. 
At  the  present  time  the  State  has  very  markedly 
restricted  its  direct  authority  ;  it  concerns  itself 
more  with  exerting  a  stimulus  upon  the  whole 
economic  system  than  with  directing  any  one 
branch  of  that  system.  This  brings  us  to  a 
yet  more  important  point,  for  with  increasing 
culture  the  respect  paid  by  the  governing  power 
to  individual  liberty  increases  also.  The  State 
feels  that  its  own  strength  and  glory  rests  ulti- 
mately on  the  freedom  of  reasonable,  thoughtful 
men.  It  strives,  therefore,  only  to  frame  such 
laws  as  the  best  among  the  people  will  approve, 
as  calculated  to  strengthen  and  not  to  destroy 
their  independence.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  the 
increasing  activity  of  the  State  will  not  swamp 
the  whole  of  human  life,  but  that  the  liberty 
of  the  individual  will  grow  with  the  growth  of 
culture.  All  such  increase  is  a  blessing,  and 
approved  by  reason  if  it  encourages  the  in- 
dependence of  free  and  reasonable  men  ;  it  is 
an  evil  if  it  crushes  or  infringes  upon  that  in- 
dependence. Compulsory  education  is  a  phrase. 
It  should  rather  be  called  compulsory  freedom  ; 
.for  here  the  State  exercises  force  against  the 

o 


ENGLAND  AND  GERMANY  77 

folly  and  indolence  of  the  conscienceless  parents 
who  would  leave  their  children  to  grow  up  like 
mushrooms. 

Consequently  we  must  not  say,  as  many 
intelligent  thinkers  have  said,  that  with  progress 
of  time  the  influence  of  the  State  upon  private 
life  will  become  less,  and  upon  economic  life 
greater.  This  is  not  borne  out  by  facts.  Our 
educational  system  strikes  its  roots  so  deep 
within  the  individual  that  through  it  the  modern 
man  is  far  more  closely  bound  to  the  State  than 
he  was  in  the  Middle  Ages.  The  mediaeval 
man  drew  most  of  his  beliefs  and  sentiments 
from  the  Church  and  the  class  to  which  he 
belonged.  To-day  there  are  moral  ideas  which 
are  common  to  whole  nations,  and  become  so 
through  the  common  teaching  in  the  schools. 
Direct  pressure  upon  conscience  has  been  aban- 
doned for  the  reasons  given  already,  because 
the  State  has  been  wise  enough  to  see  that  its 
own  real  support  is  only  to  be  sought  in  freedom 
for  the  will.  Therefore  its  activity  spreads  with 
civilization  in  ever-widening  circles,  but  tending 
always  to  become  less  and  less  direct.  It  tries 
to  exert  influence  by  guiding  and  reminding, 
and  by  encouraging  organizations  of  which  people 
may  avail  themselves  if  they  choose.  It  is 
only  through  the  exertions  of  the  State  that 
the  modern  tendency  to  gather  into  separate 
groups  for  purely  social  aims  is  in  some  degree 
checked,  and  the  way  cleared  for  the  great 
collective  personalities  which  we  call  the  Nation 
and  the  State  to  build  up  a  national  character 
common  to  all. 


78  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

There  are,  no  doubt,  colonies  not  long  estab- 
lished where  social  energies  find  freer  natural 
scope.  In  them  the  untrammelled  power  of 
the  individual  is  everything.  In  America,  for 
instance,  society  is  stronger  than  the  State.  The 
American  "self-made  man"  is  the  best  example 
of  the  development  of  social  life  in  young  colonies. 
Certain  natures  find  satisfaction  in  the  dollar- 
hunting  of  American  life,  but,  broadly  speaking, 
we  may  assert  that  existence  is  more  human 
and  more  intense  in  Europe,  steeped  in  her 
ancient  culture,  than  yonder  among  the  Yankees. 
Bancroft,  the  American  historian,  now  dead, 
who  had  a  limitless  love  for  his  native  land, 
admitted  that  it  could  offer  him  nothing  com- 
parable to  the  society  he  found  in  Berlin.  The 
peculiar  thinness  of  the  intellectual  atmosphere 
in  young  countries  is  repellent  to  sensitive 
natures. 

England  and  Germany  are  the  two  countries 
of  the  old  European  civilization  in  which  the 
activity  of  the  State  is  at  present  the  most 
developed,  and  they  are  therefore  very  interest- 
ing to  science.  Sheltered  by  her  insular  position 
from  the  fear  of  war,  England  allows  the  great 
machine  of  her  national  economy  to  run  with 
a  freedom  which  we  could  not  permit ;  but  in 
the  foundation  and  exploitation  of  her  colonies 
her  administration  is  magnificent,  and  she  has 
there  worked  out  one  of  the  most  complex  systems 
of  government  that  the  world  has  ever  seen. 
In  Germany,  on  the  other  hand,  the  complex 
system  exists  within  her  own  boundaries. 

Our  political  development  is  of  later  growth, 


THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE  79 

and  consequently  wider  than  that  of  other 
European  countries.  We  have  learnt  from  our 
predecessors,  as  the  development  of  our  literature 
also  proves.  Germany  in  the  nineteenth  century 
has  undoubtedly  taken  the  lead  in  political 
science,  after  having  followed  the  foreigner  in 
this  domain  for  two  hundred  years.  The  con- 
fused course  of  our  history  and  the  repeated 
violent  interruptions  which  our  development 
has  suffered,  have  at  least  had  the  advantage 
of  keeping  us  from  the  traditions  and  prejudices 
which  have  so  often  obscured  the  political 
judgment  of  other  peoples. 

The  complicated  functions  of  our  State  arise 
from  our  place  in  the  world,  our  history,  and 
our  geographical  position,  all  of  which  enable 
us  to  pursue  aims  which  to  other  nations  seem 
incompatible  with  each  other.  We  are  the  only 
State  which  recognizes  full  equality  between 
the  Churches.  We  can  permit  a  Church  which 
proclaims  itself  to  be  paramount  to  stand  peace- 
fully among  the  others,  and  the  Catholics  amongst 
us  have  for  the  most  part  accepted  a  culture 
which  is  Protestant  in  its  very  essence. 

Further,  we  are  the  most  monarchical  nation 
in  Europe,  and  yet  we  must  strive  to  harmonize 
with    that    a    highly    respected    Representative 
Assembly.     We  have  solved  the  riddle  of  how 
a  civilized  nation  can  also  be  a  nation  in  arms, 
and  we  shall  solve  the  yet  harder  riddle  of  how  > 
a  wealthy  nation  can  retain  the  moral  benefits  • 
of  an  army  and  a  military  service.     We  ensure 
a  minimum   standard   of  culture   by   our   com- 
pulsory   education.     Power   for   the    State    and 


80  THE  AIM  OF  THE  STATE 

freedom  for  the  people,  prosperity  and  defensive 
strength,  culture  and  faith  are  the  great  anti- 
theses which  we  seek  to  reconcile.  Such  in 
modern  times  are  the  hard  political  and  social 
tasks  which  our  State  has  to  perform.  Her  chief 
stand-by  will  be  the  comprehensive  character 
of  the  German  people  in  the  accomplishment  of 
what  constitutes  a  large  part  of  our  greatness 
and  our  rank  among  the  nations. 


Ill 

THE  STATE  IN  RELATION  TO  THE 
MORAL  LAW 

IF  we  conceive  the  State  to  be  a  moral  com- 
munity, bound  to  take  its  appointed  part  in 
the  education  of  the  human  race,  it  must  in- 
dubitably also  be  subject  to  the  universal  moral  j 
law.  Nevertheless  we  constantly  hear  of  the 
conflict  between  politics  and  morals,  which  shows 
at  once  that  the  relation  of  the  two  is  not  per- 
fectly simple  and  clear. 

For  us  Christians  the  problem  is,  in  fact,  a 
hard  one.  It  did  not  trouble  the  Ancients,  who 
recognized  no  moral  law  but  in  and  through 
the  State,  and  for  whom  politics  were  the  most 
important  part  of  ethics.  In  the  judgment  of 
Aristotle  the  individual  could  only  find  his 
consummation  within  the  State,  and  its  approval 
constituted  the  moral  right.  All  Hellenes  united 
in  praise  of  tyrannicide,  for  whoever  threatened 
injury  to  the  commonwealth  must  be  removed, 
by  legal  or  illegal  means.  Nor  did  the  Jews 
of  the  Old  Testament  think  differently.  To 
modern  poets  Judith  is  a  tragic  figure,  but  to 
her  contemporaries  she  appeared  only  as  a 
heroine  worthy  of  all  fame.  To  the  Jewish 

VOL.  I  81  G 


82  THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

people  the  State's  self-vindication  was  in  itself 
the  moral  ordinance.  To  them,  as  to  the  Greeks, 
it  was  obvious  that  the  national  enemy  must  be 
destroyed.  Everything,  even  usury,  was  per- 
mitted against  the  stranger.  As  the  text  runs  : 
"  Unto  a  stranger  thou  mayest  lend  upon  usury, 
but  unto  thy  brother  thou  shalt  not  lend  upon 
usury."  According  to  Christian  standards  the 
Jew  and  the  Pagan  of  antiquity  are  alike  without 
conscience,  inasmuch  that  it  is  not  the  individual 
but  always  the  collective  conscience  of  the  com- 
munity which  imposes  upon  each  one  the  in- 
violable law.  It  is  well  known  that  conscience 
is  never  mentioned  in  the  early  books  of  the 
Old  Testament.  The  word  occurs  first  in  the 
Book  of  Wisdom,  at  a  date  when  Judaism  was 
already  in  its  decline.  The  Sophists  were  the 
first  among  the  Greeks  to  begin  to  inquire  into 
the  relation  of  the  State  to  the  Personal  Will, 
and  a  long  interval  ensued  before  the  Stoics 
spoke  distinctly  of  the  existence  of  conscience. 

In  such  a  world  of  repression  of  individuality 
there  could  be  no  suggestion  of  conflict  between 
politics  and  morals.  The  Middle  Ages  were 
equally  free  from  it.  The  world  was  a  great 
Empire,  receiving  its  laws  from  the  mouth 
of  the  Vicar  of  Christ  and  his  representatives. 
The  German  State,  still  immature,  was  under 
the  leadership  of  the  Church,  who  laid  down 
for  it  its  moral  law.  The  Pope  had  the  right  to 
endow  whom  he  would  with  the  territory  of  the 
heathen,  as  he  did  in  the  case  of  the  Teutonic 
Order.  He  appears  also  as  the  theoretic  pos- 
sessor of  all  heathen  lands.  This  carried  out  the 


POLITICS  IN  THE  MIDDLE  AGES      83 

doctrine  that  the  unbeliever  had  no  legal  rights 
against  the  Christian,  who  could  enter  into  no 
contract  with  him  because  he  could  not  ratify 
his  oath  upon  the  Sacrament.  Only  in  the 
East,  where  the  Christian  could  not  avoid  treating 
with  his  heathen  neighbours,  did  the  peculiar 
conditions  cause  an  exception  to  be  made  to  this 
rule.  It  held  so  firm  in  Western  Europe  that 
even  in  the  sixteenth  century  a  universal  storm 
of  protest  arose  when  the  French  king  Francis  I. 
allied  himself  with  the  Sultan  Suleiman  against 
Charles  V.  The  moral  ordinances,  applied  gener- 
ally to  the  mass  of  Christian  people,  were  not 
inwardly  recognized  or  assimilated  by  the  in- 
dividual, but  imposed  upon  all  alike  by  the 
Church.  These  conditions  were  only  modified 
to  a  certain  extent  by  the  power  of  the  different 
classes  within  the  community.  The  established 
customs  conformed  to  by  the  knightly  order, 
and  the  standards  of  honour  recognized  in  com- 
merce by  the  burghers,  sometimes  softened  the 
law,  but  could  never  abrogate  it.  Under  so 
hierarchic  a  system  no  thought  of  a  conflict 
between  morals,  customs,  and  politics  had  yet 
been  entertained. 

The  change  came  suddenly  when  the  old 
authority  collapsed  before  the  oncoming  of  the 
Reformation  in  the  Christian  world. 

Only  amongst  the  ruins  of  the  old  order  can 
we  begin  to  understand  the  mind  of  the  mighty 
thinker  who  co-operated  with  Martin  Luther 
for  the  liberation  of  the  State.  It  was  Machia- 
velli  who  laid  down  the  maxim  that  when  the 
State's  salvation  is  at  stake  there  must  be  no 


84  THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

inquiry  into  the  purity  of  the  means  employed  ; 
only  let  the  State  be  secured,  and  no  one  will 
condemn  them.  Machiavelli,  to  be  comprehended, 
must  be  studied  absolutely  historically.  He  came 
of  a  race  which  is  even  now  in  the  act  of  shaking 
off  the  bondage  of  the  Middle  Ages  for  the 
modern  freedom  of  subjective  thought.  He  saw 
all  around  him  in  Italy  those  great  figures  of 
tyrants  who  so  wonderfully  personified  the  genius 
of  their  lavishly  gifted  nation.  Every  one  of 
them  was  a  born  Maecenas ;  every  one  of  them 
had  a  great  artist's  acute  sense  of  his  own  in- 
dividuality. Machiavelli  revelled  in  the  genius 
of  these  mighty  men.  It  will  be  to  his  abiding 
honour  that  he  set  the  State  upon  its  own  feet, 
freed  it  from  the  moral  sway  of  the  Church, 
and  above  all  was  the  first  to  declare  distinctly 
that  the  State  is  Power.  But  despite  it  all 
he  had  himself  hardly  stepped  out  across  the 
threshold  of  the  Middle  Ages.  When  he  tries  to 
liberate  the  State  from  the  Church,  and  declares, 
with  the  boldness  of  modern  Italian  patriots, 
that  the  Stool  of  Rome  has  plunged  his  country 
into  misery  and  woe,  he  still  holds  by  the  idea 
that  morality  is  an  ecclesiastical  attribute,  and 
that  when  the  State  cuts  loose  from  the  Church 
she  also  breaks  away  from  the  moral  law  in 
general.  He  says  that  the  State  should  only 
strive  towards  the  goal  of  its  own  power,  and 
that  whatever  appertains  thereto  is  necessary 
and  right.  He  tries  to  think  like  the  Ancients, 
but  fails,  because  he  is  a  Christian  and  has  eaten 
involuntarily  of  the  Tree  of  Knowledge. 

It  is  owing  to  the  transitional  character  of 


MACHIAVELLI— STATE  AS  POWER    85 

the  times  in  which  his  lot  was  cast  that  Machia- 
velli's  conception  of  the  freedom  of  political 
morality  remains  obscure  and  confused  in  so 
many  ways.  But  this  must  not  prevent  us  from 
acknowledging  ungrudgingly  that  the  brilliant 
Florentine  was  the  first  to  infuse  into  politics 
the  great  idea  that  the  State  is  Power.  The 
consequences  of  this  thought  are  far-reaching. 
It  is  the  truth,  and  those  who  dare  not  face  it 
had  better  leave  politics  alone.  We  must  never 
forget  our  debt  to  Machiavelli  for  this,  even 
while  we  recognize  the  deep  immorality  of  much 
else  in  his  political  teaching.  It  is  not  so  much 
his  total  indifference  to  the  means  by  which 
power  is  attained  which  repels  us,  although 
everything  turns  on  how  it  is  acquired  and 
defended,  but  the  fact  that  the  power  itself 
contains  for  him  no  deeper  significance.  In  his 
teaching  we  find  no  trace  of  the  necessity  for 
power  to  justify  itself  after  it  has  been  won 
by  its  exertions  for  the  highest  moral  welfare 
of  the  human  race. 

Machiavelli  did  not  perceive  how  his  doctrine 
of  power  for  its  own  sake  stands  self-convicted 
of  inconsistency.  Whom  did  he  choose  for  his 
ideal  of  a  wise  and  able  ruler  ?  Cesare  Borgia. 
But  is  it  possible  to  see  in  this  sinister  man 
the  ideal  statesman,  in  Machiavelli's  own  meaning 
of  the  word  ?  Nothing  that  he  created  was 
enduring.  After  his  death  his  State  crumbled 
directly.  The  ruin  which  it  had  brought  to  so 
many  overtook  it,  and  it  perished  miserably. 
The  same  fate  must  ultimately  befall  any  power 
which  tramples  upon  law,  for  in  the  moral  world 


86  THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

nothing   can   give   support  which   offers  no   re- 
sistance. 

Now  that  Machiavelli's  ideas  can  be  seen  in 
their  naked  uncompromising  hardness,  most  men 
find  the  book  of  The  Prince  downright  terrifying ; 
nevertheless  it  has  wielded  immense  influence 
up  to  the  present  day.  Even  the  coup  d'Etat 
of  Napoleon  III.  was  prepared  according  to 
Machiavelli's  recipe,  for  the  book  is  practical, 
and  its  precepts,  have  been  studied  over  and 
over  again,  especially  in  his  own  time.  William 
of  Orange  carried  it  constantly  under  his  pillow 
in  camp.  The  whole  seventeenth  century  is 
permeated  by  Machiavellism,  a  political  science 
founded  on  disregard  of  the  moral  law.  To- 
wards the  end  of  the  century  these  "  Reasons 
of  State  "  which  recked  of  nothing  but  political 
expediency  neglected  conscience  to  a  point  of 
which  we  can  no  longer  form  any  idea.  The  ugly 
meaning  which  the  mass  of  the  people  so  long 
attached  to  the  word  "  political  "  is  a  product 
of  this  period.  Machiavelli's  book  was  called 
the  Devil's  Catechism,  or  the  Ten  Commandments 
reversed.  His  name  became  a  byword,  and  a 
whole  array  of  writers  rose  up  to  oppose  him, 
each  one  more  moral  than  the  last.  It  is  a  sad 
fact  that  so-called  public  opinion  is  always  more 
moral  than  the  deeds  of  individual  men.  The 
average  man  would  be  ashamed  to  confess  or 
justify  many  of  his  own  actions.  It  is  incredible 
how  far  the  ordinary  man  will  go  in  moral 
vandalism  if  he  can  do  so  in  secret.  A  deep 
despair  from  which  he  can  see  no  escape  may, 
if  he  listens  to  its  promptings,  turn  him  into 


THE  ANTI-MACHIAVELL  87 

an  enemy  of  mankind.  It  is  natural  therefore 
to  all  nations  that  public  opinion  which  must 
face  the  light  of  day  is  far  sterner  than  men's 
real  secret  thoughts. 

With  one  brilliant  exception  the  whole  anti- 
Machiavelli  literature  is  quite  worthless.  Who 
have  been  the  chief  opponents  of  the  great 
Florentine  ?  The  Jesuits — and  it  is  fairly  safe 
to  say  that  when  the  Jesuits  attack  anybody 
their  enemy  has  been  a  great  and  noble  man. 
Their  hatred  has  two  causes — Machiavelli's 
patriotism  for  greater  Italy  and  the  openness 
with  which  he  preached  what  they  daily  practised. 
The  whole  of  their  polemic  against  him  is  in- 
herently false,  and  not  worth  a  farthing,  politically 
or  scientifically.  Nevertheless  Machiavelli  fell 
into  universal  disfavour  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
which  so  loved  to  indulge  its  visions  of  universal 
brotherhood,  which  practised  humanity  as  a 
profession,  and  was  for  ever  smoking  the  pipe  of 
peace. 

It  was  at  this  time  that  The  Prince  fell 
into  the  hands  of  one  of  Machiavelli's  greatest 
practical  disciples.  He  had  read  it  in  a  bad 
translation  and  with  all  the  prejudices  instilled 
into  him  by  Voltaire.  He  had  been  told  that 
it  was  the  great  text-book  for  tyrants.  Let  us 
look  at  the  book  through  Frederick's  eyes.  Its 
precepts  are  written  for  a  daring  and  courageous 
man,  who  has  overcome  obstacles  by  favour  and 
fortune,  who  wields  a  tyrant's  power  over 
diverse  governments,  and  has  no  scruples  as  to 
the  means  by  which  he  maintains  his  State  thus 
constituted.  Such  a  tyrant  must  be  especially 


88  THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

upon  his  guard  against  enemies  who  attack  him 
with  his  own  weapons.  To  a  Crown  Prince  of 
Prussia,  the  scion  of  a  royal  house  reigning  over 
a  loyal  people,  the  teaching  was  bound  to  seem  a 
diabolical  form  of  folly.  It  was  damaging  to  his 
princely  pride.  "  Criminal  hands  must  not  steer 
the  ship  of  state,"  he  said.  In  addition  we  must 
reckon  with  the  naive  pride  of  birth  inherent  in 
the  genius  of  his  nature,  and  possessed  by  him 
in  fullest  measure.  It  is  absurd  to  speak  of 
Frederick  the  Great  as  being  free  from  prejudice. 
Hardly  ever  has  a  Hohenzollern  been  more 
imbued  with  ancestral  pride,  certainly  not  in 
the  eighteenth  century.  This  reliance  on  his 
blue  blood  was  his  inspiration.  It  nerved  him 
to  carry  on  his  great  struggle  against  all  the 
world.  It  was  from  these  causes  that  the  young 
Prince  arrived  at  a  perfectly  natural  dislike  for 
Machiavelli's  book. 

The  critic  of  Machiavelli  who  is  worthy  of 
our  notice  as  throwing  light  upon  Frederick's 
own  reign  is  valueless  in  himself,  for  he  failed 
to  pronounce  the  decisive  judgment.  It  was  left 
for  the  historical  methods  of  the  nineteenth 
century  to  rate  Machiavelli  at  his  proper  value. 
It  was  then  that  the  question  was  urgently 
raised  as  to  how  the  State  could  attain  its  ends 
upon  the  ground  of  the  universal  moral  law. 
Richard  Rothes  was  the  first  to  devote  a  con- 
siderable section  of  his  Ethics  to  the  subject  of 
political  morality.  But  all  theologians  suffer 
from  lack  of  political  knowledge,  while  on  the 
other  hand  students  of  politics  have  seldom 
given  their  minds  to  the  subject,  from  want  of 


POLITICS   AND  MORALS  89 

the  speculative  instinct.  Oettingen  has  done  good 
work  in  this  field,  but  he,  too,  is  too  much  of  the 
theologian.  Franz  Lieber,  a  German- American, 
must  be  mentioned  among  political  writers. 
His  political  Ethics  is  unfortunately  one  of  his 
youthful  works,  but  though  rather  heavy  and 
diffuse,  it  contains  much  sound  thinking.  More 
lately  (1875)  the  late  Chancellor  of  the  University 
of  Tubingen,  Rumelin,  included  in  his  Essays  and 
Addresses  ("  Reden  und  Aufsatzen  ")  one  upon  the 
relation  of  politics  to  morals.  Here  is  put  into 
a  few  pages  much  which  is  really  decisive.  But 
upon  the  whole  the  literature  upon  the  subject 
is  poor,  and  we  must  attempt  to  form  our  own 
conclusions. 

It_is  at  once  clear  that  as  a  great  institution  for\ 
the_education  of  the  human  rare  the  State  must 
necessarily  be  subject  to  the  moral  law.  There 
is  no  sense  in  the  unqualified  assertion  that 
gratitude  and  generosity  are  not  political  virtues. 
Think  for  a  moment  of  that  frivolous  and  im- 
pudent free-booter,  Felix  Schwarzenberg.  When 
Russia  set  Hungary  once  again  under  the  heel 
of  the  Hapsburgs,  he  said  with  brutal  mockery, 
"  Some  day  the  world  will  be  astonished  at  our 
ingratitude."  The  creature  was  applauded 
for  this  political  pronouncement — and  what 
followed  ?  When  Austria  fulfilled  the  prophecy 
soon  after,  in  her  war  with  the  Orient,  and 
was  mad  enough  to  ally  herself  with  France 
and  England,  Russia  was  filled  with  passionate 
hatred  against  her,  and  has  been  her  deadly 
enemy  ever  since. 

No   State   ever   made   a   more   magnanimous 


90  THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

peace  after  a  brilliantly  successful  war  than 
Germany  in  1866.  We  did  not  deprive  Austria 
of  so  much  as  a  village  (although  our  Silesian 
countrymen  desired  Cracow,  at  the  least,  as  a 
junction  of  highways),  and  has  not  our  forbear- 
ance been  politically  justified  ?  If  a  future 
alliance  is  possible  between  two  Powers,  fresh 
bitterness  must  not  be  added  to  defeats  upon  \ 
the  battlefield.  Here  generosity  went  hand  in 
hand  with  prudence. 

Again  let  us  consider  the  founding  of  the 
Customs  Union,  and  how  valuable  to  Prussia 
was  the  confidence  which  the  small  States  re- 
posed in  the  upright  dealing  of  Frederick  William 
III.  Broadly  speaking,  it  is  not  right  to  allow 
the  fact  of  defeat  to  decide  diplomatic  re- 
lations. The  credit  which  is  a  veritable  source 
of  power  is  far  more  readily  won  by  a  loyal  and 
honest  policy,  and  a  State  gains  a  certain  moral 
strength  from  the  confidence  of  its  neighbours. 

Journalistic  heroes  of  the  pen  are  fond  of 
talking  of  great  statesmen  as  if  they  belonged 
to  a  debased  class  of  humanity,  and  of  seeming 
to  regard  deceit  as  inseparable  from  diplomacy. 
Truly  great  statesmen  have  as  a  matter  of 
fact  always  been  distinguished  by  a  noble  open- 
ness. Before  every  one  of  his  wars  Frederick 
the  Great  laid  down  with  the  utmost  clearness 
what  he  hoped  to  attain.  No  doubt  he  did  not 
absolutely  disdain  the  use  of  cunning,  but,  upon 
the  whole,  candour  is  one  of  his  leading  char- 
acteristics. How  markedly  Bismarck's  grand 
frankness  in  large  matters  stands  out  amidst  all 
his  craft  in  single  instances.  It  was  one  of  his 


DIPLOMACY  AND  ETHICS  91 

most  useful  weapons,  for  when  he  stated  plainly 
what  he  really  meant,  the  lesser  diplomats  always 
believed  exactly  the  reverse. 

If  we  run  our  eye  over  all  human  callings,  in 
which  of  them  do  we  find  the  most  deceit  ? 
Indubitably  in  commerce,  and  so  it  has  always 
been.  In  the  pursuit  of  trade,  lying  is  reduced 
to  a  system,  and  diplomacy  is  innocent  as  a  dove 
in  comparison.  The  immeasurable  difference 
between  them  consists  in  this.  When  an  uncon- 
scientious  speculator  is  telling  lies  upon  the 
Stock  Exchange  he  is  thinking  only  of  his  own 
profit,  but  when  a  diplomat  is  guilty  of  obscuring 
facts  in  a  diplomatic  negotiation  he  is  thinking 
of  his  country.  As  historians  who  seek  to  survey 
the  whole  of  human  life,  we  will  lay  down  that  I 
the  diplomat  is  far  more  moral  than  the  merchant. ) 
His  chief  danger  does  not  lie  in  deceit,  but  in 
the  spiritual  enervation  of  the  atmosphere  of  ] 
drawing-rooms. 

The  subjection  of  politics  to  the  universally 
prevailing  moral  law  is  recognized  in  practice. 
Treason  and  unrighteous  dealing  are  carefully 
provided  with  pretexts  which  indirectly  acknow- 
ledge that  dominion.  The  occasions  are  rare 
when  a  political  betrayal  has  been  openly  avowed, 
but  in  this  form  of  naked  cynicism  the  French 
have  particularly  distinguished  themselves. 
Soon  after  Napoleon  III.  had  brought  off  his 
coup  (TEtat,  he  held  a  reception  for  his  generals, 
and  one  of  the  marshals  asked  the  significant 
question,  "  Sire,  the  Army  is  getting  bored. 
When  shall  we  strike  ?  "  But  such  unashamed 
impudence  seldom  occurs  in  politics.  Even 


92  THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

when  Philip  II.  undertook  the  cruel  persecution 
and  expulsion  of  the  Moors  he  sent  assurances 
to  every  court  in  Europe  that  he  had  tried  every 
gentle  means  for  their  conversion. 

We  must  then  admit  the  validity  of  the  moral 
law  in  relation  to  the  State,  and  that  it  cannot 
be  correct  to  speak  absolutely  of  collisions 
between  the  two.  A  closer  analysis  shows  that 
innumerable  conflicts  between  politics  and  morals 
are  really  only  between  politics  and  legal  in- 
stitutions. But  these  are  made  by  men  and 
liable  to  error.  The  German  Confederation  of 
evil  memory  was  so  unsound  in  its  very  origin 
that  its  peaceful  development  was  not  conceiv- 
able. When  the  unanimous  consent  of  all  the 
so-called  States  which  composed  it  was  required 
to  effect  any  change  in  its  Constitution,  it  was 
obviously  too  unsound  ever  to  be  improved. 

Moreover,  the  lapse  of  time  may  so  alter  a 
law  which  once  was  reasonable  that  it  becomes 
folly.  When  changed  social  conditions  turn  law 
into  its  own  enemy  then  collisions  may  occur. 
In  the  last  resort  all  law  is  but  a  formula,  and 
"  Summum  jus  summa  injuria  "  will  be  true  for 
ever. 

Politics  will  thus  be  sometimes  compelled  to 
fight  against  the  forms  of  law,  and  it  is  unlikely 
that  such  a  warfare  will  be  one  of  principle. 
There  are  cases  when  there  is  in  truth  a  conflict 
of  duties,  such  as  the  individual  has  to  face 
daily  on  a  smaller  scale.  Here  we  come  to  the 
decisive  question  of  what  moral  law  applies, 
without  qualification,  to  the  State.  Alexander 
von  Humboldt  built  up  a  theory  upon  his  oft- 


CHRISTIAN  ETHICS  93 

repeated  axiom  that  every  positive  religion 
contains  a  geological  myth  concerning  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Cosmos,  an  anthropological  myth, 
and,  thirdly,  a  moral  code.  In  making  this 
assertion  he  proved  his  misapprehension  of 
Christianity,  for  where  do  we  find  in  that 
religion  the  code  to  which  our  conscience  yields 
unquestioning  obedience  ?  He  was  thinking  of 
other  religions  of  the  East  which  arose  in  a 
theocratic  world  where  the  moral  and  the  legal 
ordinances  were  one.  Such  were  the  majority 
of  the  Ten  Commandments  for  the  Jews,  for 
with  the  exception  of  the  injunctions  to  fear 
God  and  honour  parents  the  Decalogue  only 
contains  legal  commands.  Christianity  has 
now  adopted  the  Decalogue,  but  how  has  Luther 
interpreted  it  in  his  Catechism,  and  what  is  the 
positive  meaning  which  he  has  infused  into  its 
unyielding  juridical  formulae  ?  The  chief  com- 
mands of  Christianity  are  love  and  libeirtynFor, 
conscience.  A  mc;rai~-Co3e^Is^  exactly  whatsis' 
lacking,  and  therein  its  very  morality  lies.  The 
name  of  Luther  is  immortal,  because  he  once  more 
reminded  men  that  good^  works  are  valueless 
without  goedr4ntention.  For  this  reason  also 
Kant's  categorical  Imperative  was  unable  to 
exhaust  the  content  of  Christianity,  for  it  did 
not  admit  of  the  element  of  personal  freedom. 

Since  Schleiermacher  it  has  been  universally 
admitted  that  every  Christian  is  bound  to  know 
himself,  to  develop  his  personality  and  act  in 
accordance  with  it.  The  truly  Christian  ethic 
has  no  rigid  standard ;  its  teaching  is,  "  Si 
duo  faciunt  idem,  non  est  idem."  Whoever, 


94    THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

by  the  grace  of  God,  is  an  artist,  and  knows  it, 
has  the  right  to  develop  his  gift  before  all  else, 
and  may  put  other  duties  in  the  background. 
It  is  due  to  the  frailty  of  human  nature  that  this 
cannot  be  done  without  moral  conflicts  and 
tragic  guilt.  It  is  part  of  the  heavy  burden  of 
humanity  that  because  man  belongs  to  several 
communities  at  once  the  duties  imposed  upon 
him  are  bound  to  clash.  It  comes  at  last  to 
this,  that  he  attains  the  highest  perfection 
possible  when  he  has  recognized  and  developed 
the  most  essential  part  of  himself. 

When  we  apply  this  standard  of  deeper  and 
truly  Christian  ethics  to  the  State,  and  remember 
that  its  very  person  a.1ity_js  power,  we  see  its 
highest  moral  duty  is  to  uphold  that  power. 
The  individual  must  sacrifice  himself  for  the 
community  of  which  he  is  a  member,  but  the 
State  is  the  highest  community  existing  in  ex- 
terior human  life,  and  therefore  the  duty  of  self- 
effacement  cannot  apply  to  it.  As  nothing  in 
the  world's  history  is  its  superior,  the  Christian 
obligation  of  sacrifice  for  a  higher  object  is  not 
imposed.  We  praise  the  State  which  draws  the 
sword  to  fend  off  ruin  from  itself,  but  sacrifice 
for  an  alien  nation  is  not  only  unmoral,  but 
contradictory  to  the  idea  of  self-maintenance, 
which  is  the  highest  content  of  the  State. 

It  is  necessary  then  to  choose  between  public 
and  private  morality,  and  since  the  State  is 
powerjtsjiuties  must  rankjflifferently  from  those 
of  Jbhe  individual.  Many  which  are  incumbent 
upon  him  have  no  claim  upon  it.  The  injunc- 
tion to  assert  itself  remains  always  absolute. 


HIGHEST  MORAL  OF  THE  STATE      95 

Weakness  must  always  be  condemned  as  the 
most  disastrous  and  despicable  of  crimes,  the 
unforgivable  sin  of  politics.  Some  weaknesses 
of  character  are  excusable  in  private  life,  but 
never  in  the  State.  It  is  power,  and  cannot  be 
too  hardly  judged  if  it  belies  its  essence.  Con- 
sider the  reign  of  Frederick  William  JV.  We 
have  seen  that  generosity  and  gratitude  are 
political  virtues,  but  only  when  they  do  not  run 
counter  to  the  chief  aim  of  all  politics,  the  main- 
tenance of  its  own  strength.  In  the  year  1849 
the  thrones  of  all  the  little  German  princes 
tottered.  Frederick  William  took  a  perfectly 
justifiable  step  when  he  marched  Prussian  troops 
into  Saxony  and  Bavaria,  and  restored  order 
there.  But  then  came  his  deadly  crime.  Were 
the  Prussians  there  to  shed  their  blood  for 
Bavaria  or  Saxony  ?  An  enduring  gain  ought 
to  have  been  secured  for  Prussia.  She  held  the 
pigmies  in  the  hollow  of  her  hand.  It  was  only 
necessary  to  leave  the  troops  there  until  the 
rulers  had  submitted  to  the  dominion  of  the  new 
German  Empire,  but  instead  the  King  simply 
allowed  them  to  withdraw,  and  was  mocked  by 
the  princelings  he  had  rescued,  the  moment  his 
back  was  turned.  That  was  no  less  than  idiotic 
weakness,  and  Prussian  blood  was  shed  to  no 
purpose.  It  is  equally  part  of  the  essence  of 
the  State  to  uphold  and  impose  its  will  within 
its  own  borders.  A  State  which  permits  the 
slightest  doubt  about  the  firmness  of  its  purpose 
and  the  enforcement  of  its  decrees,  shatters 
respect  for  law.  Recollect  the  long  period  of 
sentimentality  when  the  German  princes  retained 


96  THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

the  right  of  pardon.  Philanthropists  had  wailed 
so  much  over  the  immorality  of  the  death 
penalty  that  the  rulers  were  infected  by  their 
ideas,  until  at  length  no  one  was  ever  executed 
in  Germany.  Then,  for  our  salvation,  came 
Hodel's  abominable  attempt,  which  stiffened 
our  princes'  backs  once  more.  This  senti- 
mental retention  of  the  right  to  pardon  was 
utterly  immoral.  It  was  accorded  in  the  first 
instance  in  order  to  adjust  the  balance  between 
the  hardness  of  the  objective  ruling  of  the  law 
and  the  subjective  abnormal  circumstances  of 
the  individual  criminal, — but  it  was  never  in- 
tended to  abolish  capital  punishment  entirely. 

It  is  a  further  consequence  of  the  essential 
sovereignty  of  the  State  that  it  can  acknow- 
ledge no  arbiter  above  it,  and  niust^  ultimately 
submit  itsjtegal  obligations  to  its  own  vefblict. 
We  must  beware  of  judging  a  great  cHsis~Tfbm 
the  advocates'  philistine  standpoint.  When 
Prussia  broke  the  Treaty  of  Tilsit  the  civil  law 
would  have  pronounced  her  wrong,  but  who 
would  dare  assert  that  she  was  guilty  now  ? 
Not  the  French  themselves.  This  applies  to 
international  treaties  less  devoid  of  all  morality 
than  that  which  Prussia  was  compelled  to  con- 
clude with  France.  Every  State  reserves  to 
itself  the  right  to  be  judge  of  its  own  treaties, 
and  the  historian  must  not  condemn,  without 
earching  deeper  to  discover  whether  it  is  fulfilling 
its  unqualified  duty  of  self-maintenance.  It  was 
the  same  with  Italy  in  1859.  Technically 
Piedmont  was  the  aggressor,  and  Austria  and 
her  hangers  -  on  in  Germany  missed  no  oppor- 


NEED  FOR  MORALITY   IN  POLITICS   97 

tunity  of  moaning  over  the  disturbance  of  the 
eternal  peace,  but  in  reality  Italy  had  been  in  a 
condition  of  siege  for  years.  No  noble  nation 
can  endure  such  a  position,  and  it  was  Austria, 
not  Piedmont,  which  was  the  aggressor  in  fact, 
since  for  years  she  had  injuriously  trampled  on 
the  highest  rights  of  the  Italian  people. 

The  maintenance  of  its  power  then  is  a  task 
of  incomparable  grandeur  for  the  State,  but  lest 
it  should  contradict  its  own  nature  the  goals 
it  strives  after  must  be  moral  ones.  The  crude 
land  -  grabbing  which  Napoleon  I.  practised  is 
not  only  thoroughly  immoral,  but  unpolitical 
in  the  highest  olegree.  France  had  not  the 
strength  to  assimilate  all  its  spoils,  and,  like 
Napoleon,  it  aimed  at  being  the  leading  State  in 
Europe.  It  was  a  sin  against  the  spirit  of 
history  which  strove  to  turn  the  rich  diversity 
of  nations  knit  by  a.  bond  of  brotherhood  into  the 
empty  form  of  a  single  World  Empire.  This 
policy  of  unabashed  robbery  destroyed  itself 
at  the  finish.  When  Napoleon  began  his  career 
his  Army  was  the  best  in  Europe.  It  was  inspired 
by  the  spirit  of  real  enthusiasm  and  an  admirable 
discipline.  What  a  change  had  come  over  it 
by  the  year  1812 !  Napoleon  only  brought  one 
quarter  of  his  Army  back  from  Moscow,  although 
he  had  suffered  no  defeat  upon  the  battlefield. 
It  was  moral  disintegration  which  really  decided 
the  Russian  campaign. 

We  recognize  now  that  the  world  -  capturing 
policy  of  our  old  German  Empire  was  likewise 
a  colossal  blunder.  It  accumulated  provinces 
whose  nature  forbade  their  complete  embodi- 

VOL.  i  H 


98    THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

ment  in  the  National  State.  We  have  been 
punished  for  this  crime  by  centuries  of  passive 
cosmopolitanism.  Likewise  it  is  both  unpolitical 

I  and  immoral  for  the  State  to  interfere  forcibly 
and  oppressively  in  the  religious  life  of  its  sub- 
jects, for  here  it  trespasses  upon  their  rights. 
By  persecuting  and  expelling  so  many  of  the 
best  of  her  German  subjects  during  the  wars 
of  religion,  Austria  inflicted  a  blow  upon  the 
Germanic  element  within  her  State  from  which 
it  has  never  recovered. 

Thus  the  State  cannot  disregard  with  im- 
punity the  law  to  which  its  moral  being  is  subject. 
Statecraft  demands  a  man  of  iron  nerve,  able  to 
carry  many  inevitable  conflicts  to  a  victorious 
issue.  Above  all  it  requires  a  commanding 
intellect.  Wisdom  is  not  merely  an  intellectual 
but  a  moral  virtue  in  the  statesman  who  is 
responsible  for  the  fate  of  millions.  He  must 
be  able  to  see  things  as  they  really  are,  and  to 
refrain  from  laying  clumsy  hands  upon  matters 
beyond  his  grasp.  Likewise  the  historian  must 
keep  his  mind  perfectly  free  from  bias  if  he  is  to 
rate  the  world  of  politics  at  its  proper  value. 
We  know  at  once  whether  he  possesses  the  true 
moral  instinct,  by  his  reasonable  and  unpre- 
judiced treatment  of  great  statesmen.  The 
student  whose  horizon  is  bounded  by  his  study 
walls  can  form  no  correct  judgment  of  real 
affairs.  Schlosser  finds  the  most  fitting  and 
noblest  aim  of  life  in  an  unruffled  contemplation. 
He  is  more  sympathetic  than  Gervinus,  but  they 
are  both  examples  in  themselves,  in  their  in- 
supportable learned  arrogance,  of  the  evils  of 


MORALITY  AND  METHODS  99 

their  own  theory.  When  we  read  the  corre- 
spondence of  Lachmann  and  Haupt  we  are 
appalled  to  see  that  such  wealth  of  learning  can 
be  combined  with  such  poverty  of  culture.  Every 
moral  judgment  of  the  historian  must  be  based 
on  the  hypothesis  of  the  State  as  power,  con- 
strained to  maintain  itself  as  such  within  and 
without,  and  of  man's  highest,  noblest  destiny 
being  co-operation  in  this  duty.  Ethics  must 
become  more  political  if  Politics  are  to  become 
more  ethical ;  that  is  to  say  that  moralists  must 
first  recognize  that  the  State  is  not  to  be  judged 
by  the  standards  which  apply  to  individuals, 
but  by  those  which  are  set  for  it  by  its  own  nature 
and  ultimate  aims.  Political  life  will  then  appear 
to  them  infinitely  more  moral  and  more  human 
than  heretofore. 

Up  to  this  point  there  will  scarcely  be  any 
conflict  of  serious  opinion,  but  the  most  difficult 
question  arises  when  we  come  to  consider  the 
extent  to  which  the  State,  to  attain  political 
ends  which  for  it  are  moral,  may  emplpymeans_ 
which  everyday  life  would  rejectjNoone^can 
deny  that  the  well-known  Jesuit  proverb  con- 
tains a  modicum  of  truth,  although  its  expres- 
sion is  too  crude  and  uncompromising.  In  public, 
as  in  private,  life  there  are  unfortunately  too 
many  cases  where  it  is  not  possible  only  to  have 
recourse  to  means  which  are  absolutely  above 
reproach.  Whenever  it  is  possible  to  attain  an 
end  which  is  moral  in  itself  by  methods  which 
are  also  moral  these  should  be  preferred,  even 
when  they  lead  more  slowly  and  more  circuit- 
ously  towards  the  goal. 


100   THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

We  have  seen  already  that  truth  and  frankness 
have  much  more  power  in  politics  than  is  com- 
monly supposed.  The  more  modern  view  is  that 
man's  impulse  for  truth  is  not  innate  but  artifi- 
cially introduced  into  the  received  standard  of 
right  by  considerations  of  expediency.  This  is 
not  so.  An  instinct  for  truth  is  born  within  us, 
and  its  only  variations  are  those  due  to  time  and 
race.  We  find  it  even  in  Orientals,  the  most 
deceitful  of  all  peoples.  The  Nabobs  recognized 
it  in  Wellington's  elder  brother.  They  knew 
him  for  a  man  who  always  said  what  he  really 
thought,  and  this  was  the  secret  of  his  immense 
influence  in  India. 

Upon  the  whole,  however,  it  is  clear  that  the 
political  methods  of  dealing  with  races  upon  a 
lower  level  of  civilization  must  be  adapted  to 
their  capacity  for  feeling  and  understanding. 
The  historian  who  judged  European  policy  in 
Africa  or  the  East  by  European  standards  would 
be  a  fool.  (There  coercion  by  terror  is  necessary 
for  self-preservation.  >  We  must  not  blame  the 
English  who  in  the  Imminent  peril  of  the  Indian 
Mutiny  bound  Hindus  to  the  cannon's  mouth, 
and  blew  their  bodies  to  the  winds.  It  is  evident 
that  the  situation  demanded  such  measures, 
and  we  cannot  condemn  them  if  we  accept  the 
English  contention  that  England's  rule  in  India  is 
beneficial  and  necessary. 

The  standards  of  relativity  apply  to  periods 
as  well  as  places.  When  we  consider  how 
frequently  States  have  lived  for  decades  in  a 
condition  of  veiled  hostility  to  each  other,  it 
is  evident  that  this  latent  war  must  give  rise  to 


i :  v  i 
t  >< 
H  :  oo 

v*- 
STANDARDS  OF  MORALITY         101 

many  diplomatic  ruses.  Take  the  negotiations 
between  Bismarck  and  Benedetti.  Bismarck 
hoped  that  a  great  war  might  perhaps  be  avoided. 
Was  he  not  acting  morally  in  the  fullest  sense 
when  he  put  off  Benedetti's  impudent  demands 
with  half  promises  of  Germany's  agreement  ? 
Under  the  same  conditions  of  latent  war  we  may 
use  the  same  arguments  to  defend  the  bribery  of 
another  State.  It  is  absurd  to  bluster  about 
morality  in  the  face  of  such  circumstances,  or 
to  expect  a  State  to  confront  them  with  a  Cate- 
chism in  its  hand.  Before  the  outbreak  of  the 
Seven  Years'  War  Frederick  had  a  premonition  of 
the  storm  about  to  burst  over  his  little  Kingdom. 
He  bribed  two  Saxon-Polish  Secretaries  in 
Warsaw  and  Dresden,  and  received  information 
from  them  which  happily  proved  exaggerated. 
When  the  salvation  of  his  noble  Prussia  hung  in 
the  balance,  should  King  Frederick  have  boggled 
over  a  respect  for  the  incorruptibility  of  official- 
dom in  the  Principality  of  Saxony  ?  Every 
State  knows  what  it  may  expect  of  the  other. 
There  is  not  one  which  would  not  stoop  to  spying 
when  circumstances  require  it.  It  is  only  im- 
portant not  to  overrate  the  value  of  the  methods 
which  must  be  permitted  to  the  Foreign  Office 
of  every  great  nation,  for  the  role  they  play  is 
not  an  important  one. 

When  we  turn  to  the  internal  Administration 
of  our  own  State  a  great  contrast  presents  itself. 
There  morality  must  be  infinitely  purer  and  more 
lovely,  for  the  institutions  of  our  own  State  are 
sacred  to  us.  Where  party  politics  are  con- 
cerned the  seeds  of  corruption  are  to  be  found 


102    THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

everywhere,  and  they  sometimes  spring  up  in  our 
Parliament  in  secret  and  indirect  ways.  Bribery 
is  occasionally  practised  by  those  interested  in 
great  industrial  undertakings,  but  seldom  in 
proportion  to  their  extent.  Let  us  compare 
ourselves  in  this  respect  with  Spain,  or  with  the 
Parliament  of  England  half  composed  of  Railway 
Directors ! 

-It  is  not  our  business  here  to  enumerate  all 
the  possible  occasions  where  collisions  between 
duties  may  arise,  and  I  can  only  cite  a  few  to 
form  a  standard  for  historical  judgment.  There 
has  been  a  wholesome  change  in  the  view  held 
formerly  as  to  the  justification  of  political  murder. 
Except  by  the  extreme  and  most  abandoned  sect 
of  Radicals  it  is  now  universally  condemned  by 
public  opinion.  When  Kotzebue  was  killed, 
all  the  teachers  declaimed  about  Harmodius  and 
Aristogeiton,  although  it  was  in  fact  not  only 
an  abominable  assassination,  but  also  an  act  of 
folly.  For  what  change  did  the  death  of  the 
wretched  Kotzebue  effect  in  Germany  ?  The 
deed  was  senseless  as  well  as  immoral.  Never- 
theless a  memorial  to  the  murderer,  Sand,  stands 
to  this  day  upon  the  Friedhof  at  Mannheim. 

Consider   upon   the    other   hand   how   public 
opinion  condemned  the  attempt  of  the  Russo- 
German,   Becker,  upon   the   life   of  the  Prince- 
Regent  William.     It  was  an  equally  vile  crime, 
but  from  Becker's  point  of  view  it  was  certainly 
not  foolish,  for  if  it  had  succeeded  the  Radical 
party  would  have  reaped  great  advantage.     But 
(that  no  newspaper  sought  to  defend  it  in  the 
,  mildest  degree  bears  testimony  to  the  growing 


POLITICAL  ASSASSINATION         103 

clearness  of  public  opinion.  Daniel  Manin,  in 
his  splendid  Letters  from  Paris,  denounced 
assassination,  which  had  become  the  fashion  in 
modern  Italy,  and  showed  that  it  required  an 
open  honourable  warfare  to  put  down  violence 
by  violence.  Yet  with  all  this  we  dare  not  talk 
of  the  absolute  advance  of  the  human  race  beyond 
all  reach  of  this  moral  danger,  for  when  we  read 
of  the  proceedings  of  the  Anarchists  at  this  present 
time  we  understand  that  it  is  possible  to  fall  into 
it  again. 

The  act  of  Charlotte  Corday  shows  how  hard 
it  is  to  pronounce  a  moral  verdict  upon  political 
murder.  Although  she  committed  the  crime 
deliberately  it  is  evident  that  her  tragic  fate 
cannot  be  judged  in  the  same  way  as  that  of  a 
common  assassin.  Then  take  the  period  of 
Napoleon  I.  when  Heinrich  von  Kleist  himself 
entertained  the  idea  of  ridding  his  country  of 
its  oppressor  by  violent  means.  Such  tempta- 
tions may  assail  even  noble  hearts.  And  so  it 
goes  on.  There  may  be  cases  even  in  the  life 
of  the  individual  where  the  end  in  view  is  so 
lofty  that  its  attainment  justifies  the  injury 
inflicted  upon  lower  ideals.  No  man  ever  went 
through  life  with  absolutely  clean  hands  and  no 
clashing  of  duties.  In  any  case  there  is  no  walk 
of  life  more  moral  than  the  statesman's,  who  on 
his  own  responsibility  guides  his  country  through 
quicksands.  So  Hardenberg  once  declared.  No 
higher  or  harder  moral  task  can  be  set  for  any 
man  than  to  spend  the  whole  strength  of  his 
personality  in  the  service  of  his  people.  We 
must  not  belittle  or  conceal  the  tragedy  of  guilt 


104   THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

which  sometimes  clings  to  great  names,  but 
neither  should  we  examine  the  leaders  of  the 
State  with  the  eyes  of  an  attorney.  We  are 
still  suffering  from  the  after-effects  of  the  political 
cynicism  which  the  miseries  of  the  Thirty  Years' 
War  brought  upon  Germany.  The  statesman 
has  no  right  to  warm  his  hands  with  snug  self- 
laudation  at  the  smoking  ruins  of  his  fatherland, 
and  comfort  himself  by  saying  "  I  have  never 
lied  " ;  this  is  the  monkish  type  of  virtue. 
7  One  more  question  arises  naturally  in  this 
context.  How  far  is  the  individual  responsible 
for  the  morality  of  the  State  to  which  he  belongs  ? 
Here  the  Natural  Law,  which  defines  the  State  as 
nothing  but  a  collection  of  small  individualities, 
goes  seriously  astray.  We  have  already  recog- 
nized that  la  volonte  generate  is  not  the  same  thing 
as  la  volonte  de  tons.  The  pure  individualism 
of  the  Natural  Law  teaching  came  to  the  pre- 
posterous conclusion  that  the  citizen  has  the 
right  to  desert  the  State  if  it  declares  a  war  which 
he  holds  to  be  unjust.  But  since  his  first  duty 
is  obedience,  such  unfettered  power  cannot  be 
granted  to  his  individual  conscience.  For  me, 
the  upholding  of  the  mother  country  is  a  moral 
[duty.  The  machinery  of  the  political  world 
would  cease  to  revolve  if  every  man  made  bold 
to  say  "  the  State  should  not ;  therefore  I  will 
not."  We  know  of  wars  which  have  proved  to 
be  absolutely  necessary,  which  have  nevertheless 
been  repudiated  by  the  nation  and  its  spokesmen. 
We  have  therefore  no  assurance  that  the  sub- 
jective judgment  of  the  individual  citizen  is 
nearer  the  truth  than  that  of  the  King  or  the 


INDIVIDUALS  AND   THE  STATE     105 

Minister  responsible,  who  command  so  much 
wider  a  political  horizon.  I  cannot  be  held 
responsible  for  a  war  which  I  personally  do  not 
approve  of,  but  I  am  still  under  the  obligation  to  I 
serve  my  country  if  it  breaks  out.  There  is  no 
vindicating  the  step  taken  by  certain  Prussian 
officers  in  the  year  1812.  Twenty-five  of  them, 
including  the  future  War  Minister,  von  Boy  en, 
and  the  military  writer,  von  Clausewitz,  went 
over  to  Russia  when  Napoleon  compelled  Prussia 
to  fight  by  his  side  against  her.  They  held  it 
incompatible  with  their  honour  to  continue  to 
belong  to  a  nation  which  in  their  over  hasty 
judgment  had  compromised  its  own.  Sentiment 
is  on  the  side  of  these  men,  but  youthful  en- 
thusiasms must  not  blind  us  to  the  deeper  question 
of  whether  their  action  could  be  held  up  as  an 
example  for  every  one  to  follow.  What  would 
have  become  of  us  if  every  officer  had  gone  over 
to  Russia  ?  Yorck  had  his  reasons  for  his  bitter 
hatred  of  these  seceders,  and  we  are  driven  to 
admit  that  finer  moral  quality  was  shown  by 
such  men  as  himself  and  Blucher  and  Biilow, 
who  endured  beside  their  king  to  the  end. 

The  individual  should  feel  himself  a  member  u 
of  his  State,  and  as  such  have  courage  to  take  ( 
its  errors  upon  him.     There  must  be  no  question 
of  subjects  having  the  right  to  oppose  a  sove- 
reignty   which    in   their    opinion    is    not    moral. 
Cases  may  arise  when  the  State's  action  touches 
the  foundation  of  the  moral  life,  namely,  religious 
feeling.     When   the   Huguenots   in   France    had 
their  religion  proscribed,  and  were  commanded 
to  worship  their  God  under  forms  which  their 


106   THE  STATE  AND  THE  MORAL  LAW 

deepest  conviction  held  to  be  unchristian,  con- 
science drove  them  out  from  their  fatherland, 
but  we  must  not  praise  the  fine  temper  of  these 
martyrs  for  religion  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
theologian  without  recognizing  the  degree  of 
tragic  guilt  which  is  always  blended  with  such 
moral  compulsion.  The  Huguenots  who  left 
their  homes  were  gallant  men,  no  doubt,  but  each 
of  them  had  a  bitter  conflict  to  fight  out  within 
himself  before  he  placed  his  love  for  the  Heidel- 
berg Catechism  above  his  hereditary  love  for  his 
country  and  his  king.  In  modern  times  there 
have  been  Radical  parties  who  have  in  their  vanity 
imagined  themselves  faced  with  a  similar  struggle, 
which  had  in  fact  only  a  subjective  existence  in 
their  own  exalted  imagination.  This  was  the 
reason  why  a  number  of  the  German- Americans 
forsook  their  fatherland.  It  is  foolish  to  admire 
them  for  this.  We  must  always  maintain  the 
principle  that  the  State  is  in  itself  an  ethical 
force  and  a  high  moral  good. 


IV 
THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

WHEN  we  speculate  upon  what  were  the  first 
beginnings  of  State  construction,  we  find  that 
Aristotle  was  not  far  wrong  when  he  naively 
defined  the  State  as  an  emanation  of  the  family., 
In  all  probability  the  first  form  of  organized 
State  was  a  tribal  community,  founded  upon 
blood  relationship.  As  we  know  that  the  original 
form  of  marriage  was  group  wedlock,  it  is  not 
difficult  to  understand  how  kinship  was  the 
earliest  political  bond.  Permanent  dwelling  to- 
gether in  the  same  place  had  no  great  influence 
upon  the  formation  of  the  State  until  much  later 
times.  The  gregarious  instinct  is  not  uncon- 
ditional in  our  race,  it  was  strengthened  as  much 
by  the  impulse  of  hostility  to  the  alien  as  by  the 
other  impulse  of  adherence  to  the  tribe  to  which 
a  man  belonged.  Political  history  dawns  on 
a  world  of  petty  States.  The  next  step  brings 
us  to  intertribal  conflicts  and  a  combination 
of  larger  masses  into  a  common  organization. 
Spoliation  and  conquest  actuated  the  formation 
of  larger  States,  which  did  not  arise  from  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people,  but  rather  were  created 

107 


108     THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

against  their  will,  the  State  being  the  self- 
authorized  power  of  the  strongest  tribe. 

There  is  nothing  in  this  to  deplore.  Physical 
force  must  be  the  deciding  factor  under  such 
primitive  conditions,  and  the  power  of  the 
conqueror  is  morally  justified  by  its  protective 
and  consequently  beneficial  action.  Thucydides 
has  expressed  this  with  penetrating  insight  in 
the  Introduction  to  his  History  which  contains 
so  many  brilliant  passages  of  genius.  He  de- 
scribes how  the  half -mythical  Minos  captured 
the  lordship  over  Crete,  and  how  he  used  his 
power  to  sweep  the  seas  free  of  pirates, 
and  thus  made  his  sovereignty  beneficent  and 
tolerable. 

We  learn  from  history  that  nothing  knits  a 
nation  more  closely  together  than  war.  It  makes 
it  worthy  of  the  name  of  nation  as  nothing  else 
can,  and  the  extension  of  existent  States  is 
generally  achieved  by  conquest,  even  if  con- 
firmed by  Treaty  according  to  the  results  of  the 
appeal  to  arms. 

War  and  conquest,  then,  are  the  most  important 
factors  in  State  construction,  but  not  the  only 
ones.  In  the  East  we  often  see  the  founders  of 
a  religion  assuming  the  task  in  virtue  of  a  Divine 
Commission.  The  separation  of  Church  and 
State  makes  this  impossible  in  Europe,  but  many 
dynasties  labour  by  peaceful  methods  for  the 
same  end.  Austria  is  a  very  peculiar  example, 
for,  as  the  Italians  say,  she  is  no  State,  only  a 
Family.  Here  a  'reigning  House  has  contracted 
marriages  in  every  possible  direction,  until  by 
matrimonial  treaties  and  exchanges  it  has  gathered 


CONSTRUCTIVE  FORCES  109 

to  itself  a  collection  of  provinces  which  had  no 
common  bond  of  origin. 

But  History  is  not  after  all  unreasonable 
enough  to  sanction  the  continuance  of  States 
thus  formed.  It  is  no  accident  which  has  sooner 
or  later  wrested  its  outlying  territories  from  the 
House  of  Hapsburg.  The  progress  of  civilization 
has  made  it  ever  more  evident  how  important 

jgeographical  solidarity  must  be  for  the  State. 
There  is  a  prevalent  desire  to  round  off  possessions 
into  a  domain  capable  of  supervision,  in  which 
one  language  is  spoken.  Thus  Austria  has  made 
herself  a  Danubian  State.  In  the  sixteenth 
century,  under  Charles  V.,  her  possessions  lay 
scattered  over  the  world  ;  for  us,  however,  he  was 
not  the  founder  of  her  power,  but  rather  Prince 
Eugene  of  Savoy,  and  Charles  of  Lorraine,  who 
conquered  for  her  the  lands  now  appertaining  to 
the  Crown  of  Stephen.  The  kingdom  of  Hungary 
was,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in  the  hands  of  the  Turks, 
and  it  was  after  it  passed  into  those  of  Austria 
that  the  Empire  was  founded  which  has  main- 
tained itself  for  two  hundred  years. 

•  Voluntary  agreements  provide  another  method 
for  State  construction,  although  no  State  was 
ever  created  by  contract,  for  it  takes  its  being 
from  the  capacities  born  in  the  human  race  for 
which  it  alone  provides  the  proper  atmosphere. 
States  already  existing  can,  however,  be  reshaped 
by  Treaty,  and  the  foundation  of  the  State  of 
California  furnishes  an  example.  Mexico  had 
abdicated  her  sovereignty  and  the  land  was 
without  a  ruler ;  without  a  State  it  could  not 
exist.  Adventurers  of  every  nation  poured  into 


110    THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

it.  The  search  for  gold  brought  murder  and 
violence  in  its  train,  against  which  the  methods 
of  Judge  Lynch  were  unavailing.  At  last  the 
conditions  became  intolerable  even  to  those 
brutal  natures,  and  they  constituted  themselves 
into  a  kind  of  free  democratic  assembly,  on  the 
North  American  pattern,  and  determined  to 
found  a  State  and  to  beg  for  its  admission  into 
the  Union,  whose  model  for  a  Constitution  they 
adopted.  In  this  manner  a  State  was  established 
by  contract,  and  took  its  place  in  the  great 
North  American  Federation. 

This,  however,  was  an  exception,  and  the 
circumstances  were  abnormal.  States  are  far 
more  often  founded  by  the  sword.  We  observe 
an  unceasing  tendency  in  modern  history  towards 
the  building  of  a  great  national  power  from  a 
small  centre,  which  begins  with  the  mere  lust 
for  power,  and  by  degrees  grows  in  consciousness, 
until  it  draws  the  strength  which  unites  it  from 
the  recognition  of  its  common  nationality.  A 
united  England  grew  thus  out  of  Wessex.  Then 
this  Anglo  -  Saxon  kingdom  conquered  Ireland 
and  Scotland  and  imbued  them  with  its  own 
culture.  The  development  of  France  was  analo- 
gous. In  this  case  the  Isle  de  France  was  the 
microcosm  of  the  ethnographical  conditions  in 
Gaul,  and  the  uniting  factor  for  the  whole 
country.  In  Spain  it  was  Castile,  and  in  Russia 
the  great  Muscovite  Empire  grew  gradually  out 
of  the  Warangian  Kingdom  of  Rurik. 

The  course  of  history  in  Germany  and  Italy 
has  apparently  been  very  different,  but  if  we 
look  more  closely  we  see  that  the  development 


ITALY  AND  GERMANY  111 

is  really  the  same,  although  infinitely  slower  and 
more  complicated,  because  the  two  great  cosmo- 
politan powers  of  the  Middle  Ages,  the  Papacy 
and  the  Empire,  of  which  these  two  nations  were 
respectively  the  centres,  were  obstacles  to  national 
consolidation,  whether  consciously  or  not.  In 
both  countries  we  can  detect  a  peculiar  searching 
and  striving  for  some  new  pivot  for  public  life. 
Germany  had  no  capital  city.  Rome  was  Papal, 
and  consequently  utterly  estranged  from  the 
national  life.  Popes  like  Alexander  III.  have 
from  time  to  time  harboured  plans  for  national 
unification,  but  the  Papacy  cannot  and  must  not 
assume  an  out-and-out  national  attitude.  The 
parallel  between  the  two  countries  is  continued 
when  they  both  exhibit  the  marvel  of  a  frontier 
province  asserting  itself  by  its  military  efficiency 
until  it  finally  takes  dominion  over  the  rest. 
There  is  one  respect,  however,  in  which  Germany 
and  Italy  differ  from  the  other  countries  above- 
mentioned.  They  do  not  trace  their  culture  to 
any  one  particular  source  within  their  own 
boundaries.  It  is  true  that  we  Germans  have 
adopted  the  dialect  of  Central  Germany  for 
our  classic  language,  even  as  the  Italians  have 
taken  the  language  of  Tuscany, — but  neither 
Tuscany  nor  electoral  Saxony  have  been  singled 
out  as  models  of  culture  for  the  rest  of  the 
nation. 

There  are  States  which  are,  rightly  or  wrongly, 
termed  artificial. 

Rightly,  when  their  geographical  position  is 
one  which  they  cannot  hope  to  maintain  per- 
manently, or  when  the  power  they  wield  is 


112     THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

disproportionate  to  their  actual  strength.  In  the 
seventeenth  century  Sweden  and  Holland  were 
artificially  ranked  as  great  Powers.  When  the 
country  which  gave  Luther  birth  failed  of  courage 
to  pursue  a  great  Protestant  policy,  these  little 
States  had  stepped  into  the  breach,  Holland  by 
sea,  and  Sweden  on  land.  We  are  bound,  however, 
to  admit  that  their  position  among  their  fellows 
was  artificial.  A  country  like  Sweden  could  not 
permanently  control  the  mouths  of  the  Elbe  and 
the  Weser  and  the  whole  coast  of  the  Baltic, 
and  dictate  her  policy  to  Germany.  There  were, 
moreover,  physical  reasons  why  England  finally 
gained  the  upper  hand  in  her  long  rivalry  with 
Holland,  whose  three  million  inhabitants  could 
not  provide  the  human  material  required  to 
colonize  an  entire  continent. 

Holland  and  Sweden,  then,  were  not  naturally 
great  Powers.  But  we  must  be  cautious  in  our 
use  of  the  phrase  artificial  State. 

After  1815  friend  and  foe  united  in  applying 
it  to  the  reconstructed  Prussia.  They  believed 
that  only  an  extraordinarily  wise  Administration 
could  supply  the  deficiencies  of  her  natural  unity. 
William  Humboldt  reverts  again  and  again  to 
this  contemporary  opinion.  It  was  entirely  false. 
What  was  there  artificial  in  the  composition  of 
Prussia  before  1866  ?  Nothing,  certainly,  in  the 
coupling  of  Pomerania  and  Westphalia  under 
one  authority,  for  they  agreed  perfectly.  If  the 
crux  were  anywhere  it  was  with  the  people  who 
dwelt  between  them,  and  were  not  under  the  same 
dominion.  The  State  was  immature,  but  artificial 
it  was  not.  The  inward  national  unity  of  the 


COLONIZATION  113 

German  race  was  its  foundation,  the  superstruc- 
ture was  left  for  the  process  of  development  to 
complete. 

In  contradistinction  to  this,  there  are  States 
whose  existence  is  more  due  to  their  neutrality 
than  to  the  impulse  of  a  strong  nationality. 
Such  are  Switzerland  and  the  two  Netherlands, 
who  only  continue  because  their  territory  is  of 
such  high  strategic  importance  that  their  neigh- 
bour Powers  begrudge  it  to  each  other.  This 
does  not  give  us  the  right  to  call  them  artificial. 
The  normal  method  of  national  State  construction, 
however,  is  also  the  most  truly  great, — by  the 
gradual  linking  up  of  the  kindred  peoples  with 
the  ruling  political  centre. 

d,  We  have  already  seen  how  superior  large 
States  are  to  small  ones.  They  are  especially 
so,  because  we  must  look  to  them  for  a  new  and 
peculiar  kind  of  State  building,  through  coloniza- 
tion. This  means  the  leading  forth  of  the 
population  of  an  existing  State,  not  merely  as 
an  emigration  of  the  ruling  race,  but  to  plant 
in  new  territory  a  dependency  for  the  mother 
country  which  remains  the  same.  Since  we 
have  reached  a  stage  in  civilization  where  race 
migration  is  impossible  in  the  mediaeval  sense, 
the  wandering  instinct  finds  satisfaction  in  colon- 
ization. When  once  the  trained  resources  of 
labour  and  capital  of  a  civilized  nation  are 
poured  forth  upon  the  virgin  soil  of  a  savage 
country  and  there  allied  with  Nature,  the  three 
great  forces  of  production  co-operate  so  effectively 
that  colonies  progress  with  incredible  rapidity. 
Such  new-born  States  have  other  natural  char- 

VOL.  I  I 


114     THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

acteristics.  In  the  first  place,  they  have  no 
history,  for  every  inhabitant  has  been  uprooted 
from  his  old  home  and  its  inherited  associations. 
Hence  the  rationalism  and  materialism  of 
colonial  life,  which  worships  wealth  as  the  highest 
of  all  goods.  Colonies  generally  display  a  brilliant 
development  of  economic  life,  but  alongside  of 
it  an  inward  aridity  and  poverty  of  intellect 
and  a  sordidness  of  existence. 

These  contrasts  between  the  parent  State  and 
its  children  are  obliterated  by  time,  especially 
when  the  two  are  geographically  united.  The 
history  of  Germany  is  particularly  instructive 
on  this  point.  The  Mark  of  Brandenburg  in 
the  Middle  Ages  was  obviously  a  colony.  Prussia 
still  more  so.  There  was  no  question  of  an  in- 
tellectual life  on  the  Weichsel  or  the  Pregel  in 
earlier  times,  but  what  a  development  it  could 
boast  of  later  !  This  colony  had  the  good 
fortune  to  remain  in  close  contact  with  the 
mother  country,  and  from  being  a  stout  buffer 
against  the  barbarian,  with  a  virile  but  sterile 
history  it  was  transformed  into  a  land  worthy 
to  be  the  cradle  of  Kant  and  Herder.  This  is 
possible  when  the  colony  keeps  touch  with  the 
older  State,  and  when  links  of  intellect  and 
sentiment  are  gradually  forged  between  them  ; 
but  the  cases  are  rare  and  exceptional.  When 
the  separation  is  wide  the  materialistic  tendency 
in  colonial  life  asserts  itself.  The  colonies  of 
ancient  Greece  in  Sicily  and  Southern  Italy  are 
examples  of  how  the  "  smartness  "  of  the 
American  is  not  an  exclusively  modern  trait, 
for  Alkaios  sings  of  it  in  true  colonial  fashion  : 


COLONIES  AND  DEMOCRACY        115 


avrjp. 

(Gold,  gold  is  the  man.) 

A  further  peculiarity  of  colonies  is  their 
trend  towards  Democracy,  inevitable  where  youth 
exercises  so  much  more  influence  on  public  life 
than  it  does  in  the  older  Europe.  Marriages 
are  earlier,  and  an  extraordinarily  rapid  increase 
of  population  results,  which  would  be  impossible 
in  countries  of  a  more  ancient  civilization.  It 
sometimes  happens  in  America  that  father,  son, 
and  even  grandson  are  all  prominent  in  public 
life  at  the  same  time,  whereas  with  us  if  the 
father  is  a  general,  a  minister,  or  a  merchant,  the 
son  is  usually  a  lieutenant,  a  student,  or  a  clerk, 
and  therefore  in  quite  a  subordinate  position. 
Youth  has  always  been  more  radical  than  age, 
and  here  is  the  adequate  explanation  of  the 
Democratic  tendency  in  colonies.  Their  rapid 
progress,  and  the  early  maturity  of  their  life, 
is,  however,  an  obstacle  to  a  high  degree  of 
culture.  They  lack  the  concentrated  atmosphere 
of  scientific  and  artistic  education  which  is  only 
to  be  found  in  countries  with  a  long  history 
behind  them.  The  great  Syracusan  was 
Archimedes  with  his  Yankee  mastery  of  the 
technical  side  of  science.  The  finest  fruits  of 
Hellenic  genius  remained  on  their  native  soil. 
It  is  scarcely  thinkable  that  the  American  colonies 
can  ever  produce  a  culture  to  equal  what  we  have 
in  Europe,  and  Washington's  hope  has  hitherto 
remained  unfulfilled. 

All  great  nations  in  the  fulness  of  their 
strength  have  desired  to  set  their  mark  upon 


116    THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

barbarian  lands.  All  over  the  globe  to  -  day 
we  see  the  peoples  of  Europe  creating  a  mighty 
aristocracy  of  the  white  races.  Those  who  take 
no  share  in  this  great  rivalry  will  play  a  pitiable 
part  in  time  to  come.  The  colonizing  impulse 
has  become  a  vital  question  for  a  great  nation. 

The  Phoenicians,  who  were  the  first  people  in 
history  to  recognize  the  majesty  of  Commerce, 
were  also  great  colonists.  After  them  came 
the  Greeks,  with  their  settlements  on  the  east 
and  west  of  the  Mediterranean  basin ;  the 
Romans  followed  ;  then  in  the  Middle  Ages  the 
Germans,  the  Spaniards,  and  the  Portuguese ; 
finally  the  Dutch  and  the  English ;  and  then  for 
a  long  time  the  Germans  were  quite  ousted  from 
the  ranks  of  the  maritime  powers. 

Agricultural  colonies  are  undoubtedly  the 
most  favourable  for  national  life.  In  places 
which  have  been  thickly  settled  by  the  mother 
country,  where  economic  conditions  are  suitable, 
and  where  the  climate  more  or  less  resembles 
our  own,  the  population  may  rush  ahead  as  it 
has  done  in  America.  On  the  other  hand  these 
are  the  colonies  which  are  the  most  apt  to  turn 
against  the  parent  State,  and  try  to  cut  them- 
selves loose  from  her.  England  has  been  warned 
by  experience  how  to  guard  against  this  danger, 
and  accords  a  degree  of  independence  to  her 
colonies  which  even  goes  the  length  of  per- 
mitting them  to  raise  a  protective  tariff  against 
her. 

The  mutual  relationship  between  colonies  and 
the  mother  country  is  one  of  the  most  delicate 
problems  of  history  ;  and  we  must  be  careful 


ENGLAND  AND  HER  COLONIES     117 

how  we  seek  to  determine  it  by  any  natural  law 
from  the  historical  world,  putting  the  problem 
of  slavery  aside.  Nowadays  nobody  would 
maintain  that  colonies  must  necessarily  break 
away.  It  is  probable  that  Canada  will  do  so 
some  time,  principally  because  of  the  large 
French  element  she  contains,  but  it  is  more  than 
doubtful  whether  Australia  will  pursue  the  same 
course.  A  moderately  wise  policy  on  the  part 
of  England  might  easily  prevent  it.  It  depends 
upon  the  men  at  the  head  of  affairs  in  both 
countries,  and  their  ability  to  read  the  signs  of 
the  times.  But  even  if  England  were  forced  to 
give  up  part  of  her  colonial  possessions  they 
would  still  be  an  inestimable  economic  and 
moral  advantage  to  her,  for  a  common  language 
is  a  most  important  aid  to  trading.  It  is  the 
reason  why  America's  principal  commerce  is 
with  England.  A  country  never  quite  loses  a 
colony  which  is  bound  to  her  by  speech  and 
culture,  even  if  the  political  bond  be  snapped. 
The  relations  between  America  and  England 
are  a  proof  of  this,  and  its  meaning  is  of  incal- 
culable importance  when  we  bear  in  mind  that 
the  world  contains,  at  the  present  day,  nearly 
three  hundred  millions  of  English  -  speaking 
people. 

We,  on  the  contrary,  realise  to-day  what 
opportunities  we  have  missed.  The  consequences 
of  the  last  half  century  have  been  appalling,  for 
in  them  England  has  conquered  the  world. 
Continuous  friction  left  the  Continent  no  leisure 
to  turn  its  eyes  across  the  seas  to  where  England 
was  capturing  everything.  The  Germans  have 


118    THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

been  forced  to  acquiesce  because  their  hands 
were  so  full  with  their  neighbours'  quarrels  and 
their  own.  There  can  be  no  doubt  at  all  that 
a  great  colonial  development  is  a  benefit  to  a 
nation.  It  is  the  short-sightedness  of  the  oppon- 
ents of  our  colonial  policy  which  prevents  them 
from  understanding  that  the  whole  position  of 
Germany  depends  upon  the  number  of  German- 
speaking  millions  in  the  future. 

It  is  madness  to  say  that  the  exodus  of 
Germans  to  America  is  an  advantage  for  us. 
What  good  has  it  done  to  Germany  that  thou- 
sands of  her  best  sons  have  turned  their  backs 
upon  their  fatherland  because  they  could  not 
earn  their  living  at  home  ?  They  are  lost  to  us 
for  ever,  for  although  certain  natural  ties  may 
still  bind  the  emigrant  himself  to  his  native 
soil,  it  is  probable  that  his  children,  and 
certain  that  his  grandchildren,  will  have  ceased 
to  be  German,  for  the  Teuton  learns  all  too 
easily  to  abjure  the  land  of  his  birth.  Neither 
are  they  in  a  position  in  America  to  maintain 
their  nationality.  It  is  with  them  as  it  was 
with  the  Huguenots  who  wandered  into  Bran- 
denburg and  were  generally  more  cultivated 
than  the  dwellers  in  the  Mark,  and  yet  were 
swamped  by  numbers,  and  lost  their  own 
national  stamp.  Nearly  one-third  of  the  North 
American  population  is  of  German  origin.  What 
priceless  material  we  have  lost,  and  are  still 
losing,  in  them,  without  the  smallest  compensat- 
ing advantages.  We  forfeit  their  labour  as  well 
as  their  capital,  and  their  financial  value  to  us 
as  colonists  would  be  inestimable. 


TYPES  OF  COLONY  119 

Thus  every  colonizing  effort  which  retains 
its  single  nationality  has  become  a  factor  of 
immense  importance  for  the  future  of  the  world. 
Upon  it  depends  the  share  which  each  people 
will  take  in  the  domination  of  the  earth  by  the 
white  races.  It  is  quite  conceivable  that  a 
country  without  colonies  may  cease  to  rank  as 
a  great  European  Power,  however  strong  it  may 
be.  Therefore  we  must  never  become  rigid,  as 
a  purely  Continental  policy  must  make  us,  but 
see  to  it  that  the  outcome  of  our  next  successful 
war  must  be  the  acquisition  of  colonies  by  any 
possible  means. 

Not  agricultural  colonies  alone  are  of  great 
importance  for  the  parent  State  ;  there  are  also 
plantation  colonies,  where  a  prolonged  sojourn 
is  impossible  for  Europeans,  but  where  natives 
enter  the  service  and  purvey  the  valuable  pro- 
ducts of  their  cultivation.  Whoever  crosses  the 
Dutch  frontier  between  Cleves  and  Nimwegen 
can  see  for  himself  what  economic  marvels  the 
Tropics  can  provide.  Cleves  is  a  perfectly  pros- 
perous little  town,  where  there  is  no  question 
of  poverty ;  but  Nimwegen  seems  to  belong  to  a 
different  world,  with  its  magnificent  pillared  and 
balustraded  villas.  These  are  the  riches  of 
India,  Java,  and  Sumatra — a  wealth  of  luxury 
far  beyond  the  dreams  of  a  German  provincial 
town. 

1 '  Mining  colonies  are  also  very  valuable  to  a 
country,  but  their  healthy  development  is  made 
difficult  by  the  uncertain  nature  of  the  industry. 
There  are  three  kinds  of  colony  which  always 
bring  gain  to  a  State  and  are  springs  of  economic 


120    THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

strength  —  plantation  colonies,  mining  colonies, 
and  purely  trading  colonies.  But  in  these  last, 
again,  a  people  may  outgrow  tutelage  and  feel 
themselves  ready  to  shake  off  the  alien  yoke  of 
capitalist  forces.  The  commercial  dominion  of 
a  stranger  is  always  hated,  and  a  people  who 
must  bow  to  it  find  it  a  heavy  burden.  Who 
was  it  who  first  showed  the  Scandinavian  and 
the  Muscovite  the  wide  horizons  of  their  own 
nationality  ?  Copenhagen  was  as  German  as 
Novgorod.  No  sooner  did  this  people  awake  to 
consciousness  than  they  rid  themselves  of  the 
rule  of  German  money-bags,  and  we  cannot  but 
admit  that  Gustavus  Vasa  did  a  heroic  and  a 
necessary  action  when  he  set  Sweden  free. 

The  Germans  have  carried  out  the  greatest 
colonization  which  the  world  has  seen  since 
Roman  times,  and  we  have  made  trial  of  it  in 
all  its  forms.  The  Greeks  had  already  designated 
two  of  them,  the  dTroifcla,  which  means  the 
unfettered  influx  of  social  forces  into  the  new 
barbarian  country  to  be  colonized,  and  then 
the  K\v)povxia  or  State -directed  colony,  where 
each  individual  receives  the  appointed  share 
meted  out  to  him  by  Government. 

This  form  was  the  most  common  in  antiquity, 
but  it  has  given  way  before  the  purely  modern 
need  for  social  and  economic  expansion.  Never- 
theless our  country  can  point  to  colonies  formed 
upon  the  second  principle ;  the  Marks,  for 
instance,  were  settled  in  accordance  with  it. 
We  can  trace  its  influence  in  the  peculiar  system 
of  communal  administration  in  Brandenburg, 
where  the  settlement  of  the  land  was  directed 


COLONIZATION  AND  CIVILIZATION    121 

by  an  official  nominated  by  the  Markgrave. 
The  lands  of  the  Teutonic  Order  were  colonized 
in  the  same  manner. 

The  civilizing  of  a  barbarian  people  is  the 
best  achievement.  The  alternatives  before  it  are 
extirpation  or  absorption  into  the  conquering  race. 
The  Germans  let  the  primitive  Prussian  tribes 
decide  whether  they  should  be  put  to  the  sword 
or  thoroughly  Germanized.  Cruel  as  these  pro- 
cesses of  transformation  may  be,  they  are  a 
blessing  for  humanity.  It  makes  for  health  that 
the  nobler  race  should  absorb  the  inferior  stock. 
Even  when  a  people  of  higher  cultivation  are 
suddenly  overthrown  by  one  that  is  savage,  or 
half  civilized,  the  same  result  is  attained  by 
the  subtle  power  of  intellect,  as  Hegel  calls  it. 
In  such  cases  the  victor  soon  adopts  the  speech 
and  customs  of  the  vanquished.  These  are 
strange  happenings,  and  intensely  fascinating  to 
the  historian,  since  in  them  the  workings  of  the 
Divine  Reason  can  be  more  clearly  traced  than 
ever.  We  see  how  the  wonderful  drama  has 
been  played  throughout  the  history  of  the  Latin 
nations  since  the  time  of  the  migration  of  races. 

The  new  races  of  Spain,  of  Italy,  and  of  France 
are  of  mixed  blood  with  their  German  conquerors, 
whose  superior  physical  strength  was  overcome 
by/the  civilization  of  the  weaker  race. 
/  The  normal  condition  naturally  is  that  the 
political  victor  should  be  in  a  position  to  impose 
his  culture  and  manners  upon  the  people  he  has 
subjugated.  This  the  Germans  did,  as  we  have 
seen,  in  the  territories  belonging  to  the  Teutonic 
Order,  but  farther  east,  in  Esthonia  and  Kurland, 


122     THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

we  were  not  strong  enough  to  effect  this  complete 
colonization.  The  German  invasion  rolled  its 
full  tide  over  Prussia,  but  the  Hanseatic  Fleet 
conveyed  only  a  few  shiploads  of  settlers  to 
Livonia  and  Esthland,  these  principally  from 
Westphalia.  In  these  two  countries  the  Teutonic 
immigrants  only  formed  as  it  were  a  thin  crust 
over  the  mass  of  the  population,  who  remained 
un-Germanized.  The  nobility  and  the  upper 
classes  were  German,  and  assumed  dominion 
over  a  people  who  were  not.  But  since  every 
nation  is  rejuvenated  from  below,  it  is  the 
peasant  population  which  decides  nationality. 
We  may  depend  upon  the  re- Germanizing  of 
Alsace,  but  not  of  Livonia  and  Kurland.  There 
no  other  course  is  open  to  us  but  to  keep  the 
subject  race  in  as  uncivilized  a  condition  as 
possible,  and  thus  prevent  them  from  becoming 
a  danger  to  the  handful  of  their  conquerors. 

States,  then,  may  take  root  and  grow  in  many 
various  ways,  and  German  history  gives  lessons 
in  them  all.  After  a  political  struggle,  in  which, 
alas  !  we  left  her  in  the  lurch,  Holland  rose  from 
a  tribe  into  a  nation,  and  consciously  and  de- 
liberately transformed  her  sailor  dialect  into  a 
literary  language.  The  Swiss  Confederacy  grew 
likewise  out  of  Germany.  By  the  thirteenth 
century  the  Swiss  had  attained  a  degree  of 
security  for  which  the  German  Empire  was  still 
long  to  strive  in  vain.  The  Empire  no  longer 
protected  Switzerland,  who  therefore  protected 
herself,  and  her  little  community  gradually 
developed  a  political  mind  so  peculiarly  its  own 
that  any  return  to  the  Germany  which  cradled 


MARCH  OF  POLITICAL  HISTORY    123 

it  is  now  no  longer  to  be  desired.  In  the  countries 
which  are  preponderatingly  German  the  French 
element  is  given  full  freedom  to  expand  ;  in 
French  Switzerland,  on  the  Lake  of  Geneva, 
we  see  the  Protestant  offshoot  of  the  French- 
Catholic  stem.  In  the  West  likewise  many  an 
outpost  of  the  Empire  has  developed  into  an 
independent  State.  It  is  possible  that  Holland 
at  least  may  some  day  return  once  more  to  its 
ancient  Fatherland,  and  such  a  reunion  is  most 
earnestly  to  be  desired. 

We  see  Austria  becoming  more  and  more 
alien  to  the  German  national  spirit,  while  Prussia, 
the  second  great  settlement  of  Germans  in  the 
east,  pursues  the  exactly  opposite  course,  and 
identifies  herself  deliberately  more  and  more 
closely  with  Germany. 

Thus  the  eternal  transmutations  of  history 
are  very  clearly  to  be  traced  in  our  own  country. 
Its  very  outline  has  continually  changed.  The 
lands  which  lie  between  the  Rhine  and  the 
Elbe  are  the  only  ones  which  have  always  be- 
longed to  Germany,  for  the  territories  to  east 
and  west  have  been  subjected  to  perpetual 
alteration.  Fully  a  third  of  our  existing  Empire 
are  lands  which  we  have  colonized.  We  must 
remember  that  countries  cannot  be  divided  by 
rule  of  thumb,  and  that  other  factors,  besides 
pure  reason,  have  helped  to  draw  the  map  of 
Europe,  for  States  will  be  for  ever  shaping 
themselves  anew. 

It  is  not  easy  to  decide  scientifically  the 
precise  moment  of  the  birth  of  a  new  State.  It 
is  clear  that  when  the  Prince  of  Orange  came  to 


124     THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

England  in  1688  no  new  State  arose,  and  that 
what  took  place  was  merely  the  further  develop- 
ment of  the  State  already  existing,  whereas  a 
new  State  was  actually  formed  with  the  Norman 
Conquest  in  1066.  The  conditions  in  Germany 
are  less  simple.  The  present  German  Empire 
considers  itself  only  as  the  legal  successor  of 
the  North  German  Confederation,  although  in 
relation  to  the  older  German  constitutions  it 
claims  to  be  a  completely  new  State. 

But  this  purely  juridical  standpoint  will  not 
content  the  political  historian.  He  sees  that 
the  German  nation  has  always  been  actuated  by 
the  same  constructive  political  impulse,  and  that 
Germany  has  been  a  cohesive  State  for  more 
than  a  thousand  years.  The  German  Empire 
is  founded  on  its  historic  right  to  the  title. 

There  is  no  truth  more  important  for  the 
political  development  of  a  people,  than  the  old 
one  that  a  State  is  maintained  by  the  same 
forces  which  have  helped  to  build  it  up.  This 
is  the  reason  why  all  healthy  States  have  always 
had  a  conservative  tendency.  This  applies  to 
all  their  forms.  We  hear  much  of  the  incon- 
stancy of  the  Athenian  Democracy,  but  in  actual 
fact,  when  a  crisis  arose,  they  reiterated  the 
decree  that  the  ancient  custom  and  law  of  the 
State  should  still  hold  good.  The  same  con- 
servative inclination  swayed  the  Romans,  who 
held  by  their  existing  institutions  in  doubtful 
cases.  All  great  nations  have  this  true  political 
instinct,  the  very  opposite  of  the  shallow  Radical- 
ism which  loves  novelty  for  its  own  sake.  Very 
old  peoples  are  almost  exaggerated  in  their 


POLITICAL  PROGRESS  125 

conservatism.  It  is  acknowledged  that  England 
changes  her  laws  too  seldom,  inasmuch  that 
the  old  ones  stand  unrepealed,  merely  with  new 
clauses  added  to  them,  so  that  we  may  find 
the  English  Parliament  appealing  to  precedents 
dating  from  the  fifteenth  century.  The  Ameri- 
cans also  display  this  turn  of  mind  very  strongly  ; 
their  Constitution  has  only  been  once  changed 
by  a  couple  of  paragraphs  in  a  hundred  years. 
They  pay  a  worship  to  their  forefathers  which 
may  be  overdone,  but  is  right  in  the  main.  A 
people  which  fails  in  respect  to  an  existing 
Dynasty  or  to  great  inherited  institutions  is 
politically  unfit. 

This  must  not  imply  that  perpetuation  is  the 
highest  duty  for  a  State,  for  its  gift  to  posterity 
naturally  depends  upon  the  value  of  its  achieve- 
ment in  the  present ;  otherwise  we  should  have 
to  find  our  ideal  in  the  stagnant  political  life  of 
the  countries  ruled  by  oriental  despots.  Pauses 
in  national  development  may  occur  even  among 
peoples  whose  national  life  is  healthy,  and  if  long 
continued  they  are  attended  by  the  worst  con- 
sequences for  the  State.  Germany  and  Italy 
have  experienced  them,  and  have  had  to  expiate 
them  bitterly.  What  would  we  not  give  to 
strike  out  of  our  history  the  century  which 
elapsed  between  the  religious  Peace  of  Augsburg 
and  the  Treaty  of  Westphalia  ?  Our  national 
progress  was  at  a  complete  standstill,  and  after 
the  Thirty  Years'  War  we  had  as  a  nation  to  be 
not  only  born,  but  trained  afresh,  and  let  slip 
the  precious  time  in  which  other  nations  were 
working  for  expansion  and  security. 


126    THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

When  the  ancient  institutions  of  the  State 
are  no  longer  adapted  to  changed  social  condi- 
tions, the  law  must  be  renewed  and  remodelled, 
for  it  can  be  nothing  but  the  expression  of  given 
social  forces.  When  such  reconstruction  pro- 
ceeds upon  the  lines  of  law  we  call  it  Reform ; 
but  there  are  moments  in  the  history  of  every 
State  when  the  legal  sanction  cannot  be  given, 
or  is  made  impossible  by  human  passion.  Force 
steps  in,  and  we  speak  of  Revolution.  This 
word  took  its  new  and  pregnant  meaning  in  the 
days  of  Henry  IV.  of  France,  when  this  king 
was  converted  to  the  Catholic  beliefs  of  the 
majority  of  his  people.  Then  all  at  once  the 
League  followed  the  white  plume  of  the  Bourbon, 
to  which  they  had  but  lately  refused  allegiance. 
When  the  question  was  put  to  one  who  openly 
displayed  the  tokens  of  complete  conversion, 
how  this  had  so  suddenly  come  to  pass,  he 
answered  simply,  "  Que  voulez-vous,  c'est  la 
revolution."  Since  then  Revolution  has  meant 
a  violent  reversal  of  political  conditions. 

There  is  no  principle  in  Revolution,  either 
for  good  or  evil.  The  French  in  their  time 
have  called  it  holy,  while  German  conservatives 
like  Stahl  after  1848  looked  upon  it  as  a  work 
of  the  devil,  which  should  be  combated  always 
and  everywhere.  Both  were  wrong.  In  itself 
a  revolution  is  always  unrighteous,  for  the 
violent  disturbance  of  authority  contradicts  the 
reason  residing  in  the  State.  Therefore,  since 
no  revolution  can  be  blameless  we  will  leave  it 
to  those  natural  philosophers  who  trespass  upon 
the  domain  of  the  historian  to  prate  of  innocent 


REFORM  AND  REVOLUTION         127 

and  virtuous  revolutionaries.  But  because  we 
have  seen  that  the  life  of  history  always  contains 
the  tragic  element  of  guilt,  we  can  see  also  that 
Revolution  need  not  be  absolutely  condemned 
as  diabolic.  The  constitution  of  some  States  is 
so  at  variance  with  reason  that  their  peaceful 
development  is  impossible.  No  reform  could 
mend  the  German  Confederation,  and  the  crisis 
of  1866  was  undoubtedly  a  revolution,  for  the 
Confederation  was  framed  with  a  rigidity  which 
was  to  endure  for  ever,  and  the  withdrawal  of 
one  member  would  shatter  the  whole.  Yet  no 
one  can  deny  that  this  revolution  was  a  moral 
necessity.  History  affords  no  instance  of  a 
State  which  has  accomplished  its  development 
without  revolution.  The  Prussian  State  was 
founded  upon  a  tremendous  one — the  seculariza- 
tion of  Prussia,  then  subject  to  the  Teutonic 
Order.  The  theocratic  authority  which  had  sunk 
into  the  sloth  of  hypocrisy  and  deceit,  and 
which  yet  from  its  very  nature  bore  the  motto, 
"  Sint  ut  sunt,  aut  non  sint  "  upon  its  banner, 
was  routed  by  freedom  and  progress.  In  this 
case  even  the  Ultramontane  tacitly  admits  that 
the  old  system  could  no  longer  be  upheld.  Again, 
who  dares  condemn  the  revolt  of  the  Netherlands 
against  Spain  ?  The  soul  would  be  servile  indeed 
which  denied  its  moral  justification  and  necessity. 
This  being  so,  and  if  there  is  no  State  whose 
history  does  not  record  some  such  rightful 
defiance  of  law,  we  cannot  admit  the  absolute 
evil  of  revolution.  It  is  clear  that  there  are 
many  instances  where  morality  is  on  the  side  of 
revolt.  But  in  every  one  of  them  the  reverence 


128   THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

for  law  has  been  shattered ;  social  passions, 
above  all  covetousness,  have  been  aroused,  and 
damage  done  which  is  hard  indeed  to  repair. 
The  kind  of  revolution  from  above  which  we  call 
a  coup  d'Etat  can  of  course  be  carried  out  with  a 
certain  seeming  orderliness ;  it  has  the  advantage 
of  being  quickly  accomplished,  and  when  pru- 
dently guided  the  old  tranquillity  is  apparently 
soon  restored.  On  the  other  hand,  repeated 
coups  d'Etat  can  injure  beyond  remedy  the 
respect  for  constituted  authority.  When  a  nation 
has  experienced  many  of  them  it  may  lose  its 
instinct  for  legality  and  its  standard  of  right, 
and  become  as  frivolous  as  the  French,  the 
Spaniards,  and  the  South  Americans  to-day. 

A  different  kind  of  peril  attends  the  revolu- 
tion from  beneath.  Passions  rage  more  un- 
restrainedly, but  the  inward  recognition  of  new 
conditions  is  accomplished  with  less  difficulty, 
and  law-breaking  is  more  easily  remedied.  Both 
types,  however,  are  diseases  of  the  body-politic, 
and  nothing  is  more  unworthy  than  the  worship 
of  revolution  as  a  holy  thing.  The  historian 
should  always  investigate  calmly  whether  it 
can  be  justified  on  deeper  moral  grounds.  He  is 
well  aware  that  no  State  has  ever  yet  kept  to 
the  strict  letter  of  the  law.  As  the  world-wise 
old  Venetian  Sanudo  once  said,  "  No  gold  is 
without  alloy  ;  no  government  is  without  taint 
of  usurpation." 

Moreover,  it  is  a  doctrinaire  interpretation 
of  history  to  force  a  distinction  between  a  legiti- 
mate and  a  revolutionary  State.  Who  was  the 
inventor  of  the  expression  "  legitimate  "  in  its 


LEGITIMACY  AND  REVOLUTION    129 

modern  sense  ?  None  other  than  Talleyrand, 
and  when  he  used  it  at  the  Vienna  Congress 
he  applied  it  to  the  Bourbons  and  their  Nea- 
politan relations  and  their  protege  the  King  of 
Saxony.  According  to  him,  Prussia  and  Russia 
and  every  other  country  which  opposed  the 
Bourbon  interest  were  revolutionary.  It  was  a 
frivolous  phrase,  invented  to  enlist  the  thought- 
less and  the  interested  for  the  Bourbon  cause. 

If  we  define  a  legitimate  government  to  be 
one  which  has  acquired  its  actual  possessions 
and  its  Constitution  through  an  acknowledged 
title,  or  by  inheritance,  or  by  wars  admittedly 
righteous,  we  ask  ourselves  what  State  in  Europe 
to-day  deserves  the  name.  It  would  be  mockery 
to  bestow  it  upon  France  ;  the  English  succession 
rests  upon  a  violent  revolution;  Sweden  and 
Denmark  are  ruled  by  monarchs  who  govern 
by  right  of  it;  Belgium's  whole  existence  is  due 
to  the  same  cause ;  Italy  is  in  like  case ;  and  in 
Germany  the  glorious  Prussian  State  must  thank 
the  secularization  of  the  lands  held  by  the 
Orders  for  its  very  being.  Moreover  in  candour 
we  must  admit  that  the  war  of  1866  was  not 
only  an  international,  but  also  a  national  war. 
Bavaria,  Darmstadt,  Wiirtemberg,  and  Baden 
hold  three -fourths  of  their  territory  to-day 
through  the  secularization  of  the  States  of  the 
Church,  and  the  mediatizing  of  the  Imperial 
cities,  and  of  the  smaller  nobility.  No  one  will 
contend  that  all  this  was  brought  about  without 
revolution.  The  conclusion  is  that  the  two 
expressions,  legitimacy  and  revolution,  are  elastic. 
A  lawful  development  is  the  normal,  but  to 

VOL.  I  K 


130   THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

every  State  without  exception  moments  arrive 
when  it  can  go  no  further  upon  peaceful  lines, 
and  war  without  or  revolution  within  becomes 
inevitable. 

We  Germans  cannot  rate  our  good  fortune 
too  highly  in  our  revolution  of  1866  having  been 
accomplished  by  war,  and  not  by  popular  rising 
and  popular  vote  as  in  Italy.  The  preponder- 
ating strength  of  Prussia  put  it  in  her  power 
to  re-establish  order.  Hence  it  came  about 
that  the  unavoidable  disturbance  was  effected 
with  the  utmost  possible  gentleness.  Admitting 
that  the  desire  of  the  masses  for  German  unity 
had  become  so  urgent  that  revolution  would 
have  been  inevitable,  it  is  clear  that  had  it 
occurred  the  defeated  party  would  still  be 
cherishing  a  silent  hostility  towards  the  victors, 
whereas  the  war  and  the  mild  terms  on  which 
peace  was  concluded  filled  the  opponents  with 
so  much  mutual  esteem  and  spirit  of  conciliation 
that  within  four  years  they  were  fighting  side 
by  side  against  France  as  true  comrades. 

The  result  of  revolution  must  be  the  final 
criterion  of  its  necessity.  Not  the  cruel  results 
of  the  moment,  but  the  enduring  improvement 
in  conditions.  Such  needful  disturbances  of  exist- 
ing right  are  soon  obliterated  from  the  memory 
of  the  people,  and  of  the  persons  affected.  Thus 
the  abolition  of  the  mass  of  small  States  by  the 
decree  of  the  Council  of  the  Empire  was  looked 
upon  by  everybody  as  no  more  than  a  necessity 
for  the  sweeping  away  of  the  old  abuses.  The 
fall  of  the  so-called  States  of  the  Church  in 
Germany  was  unavoidable  from  the  moment  that 


DEFENCE  OF  REVOLUTION         131 

the  Reformation  triumphed  in  our  country. 
It  was  its  political  consequence,  although  an 
evil  fortune  for  us  delayed  its  fulfilment  at  its 
proper  time,  and  the  work  had  to  be  done  over 
again  in  1803,  when  what  had  long  been  dead 
at  last  vanished  from  view.  The  final  verdict 
upon  the  French  Revolution  has  not  yet  been 
pronounced,  for  the  dominion  of  the  Rothschilds 
over  modern  France  is  so  odious  that  it  is  hard 
to  say  whether  the  pre-revolution  period  should 
not  be  preferred. 

The  slight  degree  of  relative  injustice  which 
may  possibly  have  attached  to  the  German 
Revolution  of  1866  has  been  brilliantly  justified 
by  1870,  when  the  great  historic  destiny  of  a 
noble  people  was  indeed  restored  to  them  in  full. 

Thus  a  breach  of  constituted  law  can,  like 
all  other  human  transgression,  be  wiped  out  by 
Time.  We  must  even  go  further  in  this  historical- 
moral  justification  of  revolution,  and  assert  that 
even  legally  incontestible  rights  may  eventually 
lapse. 

There  are  undeniably  some  princely  families 
who  have  conducted  themselves  in  such  a  way 
as  to  forfeit  all  claim,  in  the  deeper  sense  of 
the  word,  to  be  again  pretendants  to  the  throne. 
This  is  especially  true  of  the  House  of  Stuart. 
They  remained  stationary  while  the  English 
nation  progressed. 

Even  thirty  years  ago  it  could  be  truthfully 
said  of  the  Bernadottes  in  Sweden  that  they 
had  gradually  become  so  really  the  legitimate 
rulers  that  a  return  of  the  old  dynasty  would 
have  been  a  wanton  innovation. 


132   THE  RISE  AND  FALL  OF  STATES 

Henry  V.  of  France  was  personally  a  very 
worthy  if  narrow-minded  man.  He  believed 
in  his  legal  title,  and  if  he  had  not  committed 
the  gigantic  folly  of  repudiating  the  tricolour, 
France  might  have  returned  to  her  old  allegiance. 
But  even  he  could  only  have  founded  a  new 
party  dominion,  for  it  was  not  given  to  France 
to  know  the  peculiar  blessing  of  a  monarchy 
which  stands  on  power  above  party.  The  Bour- 
bonists  have  the  strongest  legal  claim  in  France 
to-day,  but  they  are  very  few. 

It  is  evident,  then,  that  there  is  such  a  thing 
as  prescriptive  right  irrespective  of  numbers. 

Many  are  the  forms  under  which  States  arise 
and  thrive  ;  equally  various  may  be  the  ways 
of  their  fall.  It  comes  oftenest  through  war ;  it 
has  never  yet  come  through  a  treaty,  'l  In  most 
cases  States  disappear  through  unification  with 
some  other  to  whose  dominion  they  are  made 
subject.  Sometimes  a  people  whose  role  in 
history  is  played  out  dies  in  the  physical  sense. 
This  is  true  not  only  of  such  savage  races  as  the 
Redskins  of  America,  who  withered  before  the 
basilisk  eyes  of  the  Palefaces,  but  also  of  great 
and  noble  peoples  like  the  Romans,  whose 
Empire  crumbled  at  last  in  total  decay,  physical 
and  moral.  There  is  no  spectacle  more  tragic 
than  the  death  of  a  State,  and  the  end  of  a  nation 
which  has  lost  the  moral  strength  to  enforce 
and  uphold  its  own  beliefs.  A  Christian  historian 
once  said  that  Christian  peoples  can  never  die. 
This  generalization  is  inaccurate  ;  it  is  doubtful, 
for  instance,  whether  Poland  will  ever  arise 
anew.  Certainly  never  in  its  former  shape, 


GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED     133 

and  the  insensate  obstinacy  of  the  Poles  would 
not  accept  compensations  in  the  region  of  the 
Black  Sea.  The  wonderful  revivifying  power 
which  lies  in  Christianity  may  indeed  hinder 
the  decay  of  a  nation,  but  cannot  absolutely 
prevent  it. 


V 
GOVERNMENT  AND  THE  GOVERNED 

WE  have  now  to  examine  the  last  series  of 
principles  which  are  the  foundation  of  political 
science,  namely,  the  relation  of  rulers  to  subjects 
considered  apart  from  social  differences.  As 
all  civil  life  contains  different  classes  both  of 
rank  and  wealth,  there  must  be  in  every  State 
a  natural  contrast  between  the  rulers  and  the 
ruled  ;  there  must  be  superiors  and  inferiors. 
The  collective  number  of  those  who  exercise 
authority  in  right  of  law  will  be  shortly  termed 
the  rulers,  while  the  remaining  mass  of  the 
population  are  called  the  subjects. 

It  is  a  Radical  prejudice  borrowed  from  France 
to  see  something  derogatory  in  the  word  "  sub- 
ject," and  to  substitute  the  term  of  "  citizen." 
The  two  words  are  absolutely  synonymous,  except 
that  the  first  lays  most  stress  on  the  obligation 
and  the  second  on  the  privileges.  When  the 
Freiherr  von  Vincke  once  spoke  in  the  Prussian 
Chamber  of  Deputies  of  subjects,  and  the  Pro- 
gressive Party  objected  to  it  on  the  score  of 
servility,  Vincke  answered  truly,  "  Yes,  Sirs, 
I  am  a  subject  of  the  King  of  Prussia,  and  so 
is  every  one  of  you." 

134 


THE  SOVEREIGN  135 

Naturally  we  are  not  subjects  of  a  fellow- 
mortal  as  such,  but  in  so  far  as  he  represents 
the  collective  authority  of  the  State  which  is 
expressed  in  him.  It  is  the  constitutional  sub- 
ordination which  is  observed  towards  the  Head 
of  the  Constitution. 

Since  the  State  is  under  all  circumstances  a 
Government,  there  is  always  a  difference  between 
it  and  those  whom  it  governs.  The  State  alone 
is  sovereign,  and  all  others  are  subject  in  relation 
to  it.  It  is  therefore  incorrect  to  speak  of  the 
proprietary  right  of  a  reigning  family  in  the 
State,  but  no  less  false  to  talk  of  a  sovereignty 
of  the  people  which,  as  it  were,  places  the  people 
outside  the  State.  We  can  only  say  that  the 
State  is  sovereign,  and  the  body  which  has  been 
constitutionally  endowed  with  the  supreme 
power  is  described  as  sovereign.  This  is  made 
very  plain  in  a  monarchy,  but  is  no  less  present 
in  every  other  form  of  State.  The  customary 
mode  of  address  of  the  Venetians  is  very  signifi- 
cant. The  ordinary  man  spoke  of  the  Supreme 
Council  collectively  as  "  our  Illustrious  Prince." 
The  Assemblage  of  her  nobility  was  the  sovereign 
of  Venice.  In  a  pure  Democracy  the  people 
are  undoubtedly  sovereign,  but  through  their 
legal  Assembly,  not  in  the  sense  in  which  the 
Jesuits  and  Rousseau  use  the  phrase.  Their 
right  to  the  title  is  clearly  set  forth  in  the  wording 
of  the  North  American  Constitution  :  "  We, 
the  people  of  the  United  States,  decree,  etc., 
etc." 

Even  as  the  eclectic  ideal  of  a  mixed  State 
which  is  neither  flesh  nor  fowl  can  never  be 


136     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

realized,  neither  can  there  ever  be  any  doubt 
who  is  the  real  sovereign  in  a  so-called  Con- 
stitutional monarchy.  A  State  where  sove- 
reignty was  divided  among  many  would  be 
impossible  ;  only  political  dilettantes  like  Cicero 
would  dally  with  such  eclectic  fooleries.  Although 
Cicero  lived  in  one  of  the  most  consistently 
aristocratic  societies  which  the  world  has  ever 
seen,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  describe  it  as  an 
agreeable  blend  of  an  aristocracy,  a  monarchy, 
and  a  Republic.  Sovereignty  cannot  be  divided, 
and  it  is  important  to  realize  this  and  not  to  be 
misled  by  constitutional  catchwords. 

The  word  Constitutionalism  covers,  in  fact, 
many  widely  varying  political  forms,  in  which 
the  seat  of  authority  is  found  in  many  different 
places.  In  Belgium,  for  instance,  it  clearly 
resides  in  the  people.  The  whole  spirit  of  the 
State  is  expressed  in  the  most  important  clause 
of  the  Belgian  Constitution,  "  All  power  eman- 
ates from  the  nation."  The  dynasty  reigns  by 
favour  of  the  people,  and  in  spite  of  all  the  fine 
speeches  about  hereditary  succession  the  King 
is  an  official  of  the  Republic,  and  appointed  by 
them.  It  would  be  a  misrepresentation  of  history 
to  say  the  same  of  Germany.  We  did  very  nearly 
adopt  the  Belgian  Constitution  in  1848,  and  a 
great  many  of  its  clauses  were  incorporated  in 
ours,  and,  thanks  to  Benedict  Wai  deck,  its 
accursed  mixture  of  Radicalism  and  Clericalism 
was  to  be  infused  into  our  noble  Prussia.  But 
the  chief  clause  of  all  was  left  out ;  even  the 
Radicals  felt  that  such  a  denial  of  our  whole 
monarchical  history  would  cry  to  Heaven. 


DIFFERENT  STANDPOINTS          137 

Therefore  in  Prussia,  despite  the  constitution, 
the  monarch  is  still  the  King. 

In  England  again  it  is  very  obvious  where 
authority  resides.  Sovereign  in  England  is 
Parliament ;  the  Upper  and  the  Lower  House. 
These  must  co-operate  to  enable  the  sovereign 
will  to  be  expressed.  The  actual  power  lies 
undoubtedly  in  the  House  of  Commons,  the 
House  of  Peers  has  some  voice,  and  the  Crown 
stands  modestly  by.  This  arrangement  was  quite 
sound  until  a  few  decades  ago  ;  it  only  became 
confused  and  obscure  with  the  uprising  of  the 
democratic  element.  Whether  in  face  of  the 
increasing  power  of  that  element  the  country  can 
continue  to  be  governed  on  the  old  lines  will  be 
a  question  for  the  future.  In  Germany  there  is 
no  doubt  that  we  still  have  real  monarchies.  As 
far  as  it  is  possible  to  speak  of  authority  in  the 
various  States  of  the  Empire  the  monarch  is 
sovereign,  and  in  the  kingdom  of  Prussia  this  is 
true  without  reservation. 

We  briefly  apply  the  word  rulers  to  the  whole 
number  of  those  commissioned  by  the  sovereign 
to  govern  the  State,  and  in  every  conceivable 
instance  these  are  divided  by  a  deep  gulf  from 
the  political  outlook  of  those  they  rule.  People 
who  are  merely  governed  consider  things  from 
beneath,  they  think  firstly  of  where  their  own  shoe 
pinches,  and  approach  the  State  as  petitioners 
and  claimants.  That  is  the  natural  point  of 
view  of  the  governed,  and  there  are  natures 
who  never  forsake  it.  The  Deputy  Lasker  was 
their  type,  fastening  with  eager  perspicacity  on 
every  grievance,  and  making  the  most  of  it. 


138     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

The  criticism  of  finance  by  such  persons  is 
most  instructive.  In  the  years  following  1815 
a  whole  group  of  quite  learned  men  wrote  books 
about  fiscal  matters  which  to-day  seem  to  have 
been  penned  by  lunatics.  The  question  of  what 
is  essential  to  the  existence  of  the  State  requires 
to  be  answered  politically.  Hansemann,  how- 
ever, in  his  book  Prussia  and  France :  Criticism 
of  the  Economic  System  of  both  Nations,  inquires 
with  the  utmost  naivete^  "  What  is  the  cheapest 
way  of  governing  ?  "  and  thereby  simply  sup- 
presses the  Army  Estimates.  Only  one,  a 
Professor  Benzenberg,  wrote  on  the  subject  of 
Prussian  finance,  and  measured  the  income  of 
the  State  by  the  standard  of  its  absolutely 
necessary  expenses ;  in  other  words  he  considered 
the  conditions  from  above. 

It  was  exactly  the  same  with  the  Army. 
Formerly,  and  so  long  as  the  State  was  regarded 
merely  as  an  economic  enterprise,  the  opinion 
prevailed  in  Germany  that  the  economic  principle 
of  division  of  labour  should  apply  to  the  Army 
also.  There  was  a  demand  for  professional 
soldiers,  well-drilled  mercenaries,  to  stand  between 
the  civil  population  and  the  disturbance  of  war. 
Nothing  but  bitter  experience  has  taught  the 
average  man  to  feel,  as  he  does  to-day,  that 
military  duty  stands  immeasurably  above  finan- 
cial considerations,  and  that  it  is  best  kept  alive 
by  a  system  of  universal  service. 

We  pass  from  this  naive  self-absorption  on 
the  part  of  the  governed  to  the  totally  different 
political  outlook  essential  to  the  rulers  who 
consider  the  State  from  the  standpoint  of  the 


CRITICISM  OF  GOVERNMENT       139 

whole  community,  not  as  members  of  an  interested 
group.  Their  first  care  must  be  for  the  power 
and  unity  of  the  whole,  and  since  they  carry  the 
heavy  responsibility  of  the  fate  of  millions  they 
look  upon  strict  obedience  as  the  first  necessity. 
It  follows  that  every  healthy  Government  feels 
the  need  of  continuity.  It  is  well  known  that 
when  members  of  an  opposition  take  part  in 
government  they  have  to  endure  from  their 
former  associates  the  reproach  of  a  change  of 
opinions  and  lost  freedom  of  thought.  This 
is  quite  unjust ;  the  fact  is  that  these  very  men, 
who  once  criticized  from  their  own  standpoint 
only,  now  see  for  the  first  time  how  many  other 
interests  have  to  be  safeguarded.  This  is  the 
reason  why  local  self-government  is  of  such 
high  political  importance.  It  fills  the  middle 
classes  with  the  ideas  of  those  who  govern  them. 
The  greater  the  number  of  citizens  who  can  be 
induced  to  share  in  political  activity  and  help 
to  bear  its  responsibilities,  the  greater  will  be 
the  number  of  persons  imbued  with  practical 
knowledge  of  matters  political,  and  also  with 
something  of  the  feeling  of  responsibility. 

Even  historians  fall  into  one  or  other  of  the 
two  divisions.  A  view  from  above  gives  the 
stronger  guarantee  of  historical  impartiality. 
The  ideal  is  the  combination  of  both  qualities. 
The  historian  should  be  able  to  enter  into  the 
motives  of  statesmen  without  overlooking  the 
passions,  the  cravings,  and  the  bitter  necessities 
of  the  masses.  By  this  standard  we  can  measure 
the  gigantic  strides  which  history  made  under 
Ranke,  who  did  study  the  State  from  above.  It 


140     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

is  an  immense  boon  that  he  was  the  pioneer  of 
research  among  historical  archives.  On  the  other 
hand  he  teaches  us  too  little  of  the  life  of  the 
people.  We  move  with  him  in  distinguished 
society;  he  cannot  depict  the  brute  in  man. 
Nevertheless  this  is  a  better  fault  for  an  historian 
than  inability  to  understand  the  working  of  the 
State,  and  lack  of  power  to  take  a  detached  view. 

The  best  way  to  arrive  at  a  fair  and  unpre- 
judiced judgment  is  to  study  the  difficulties  of 
government  in  individual  cases.  I  was  covered 
with  abuse  when  I  first  pointed  out  that  the 
Zollverein  was  entirely  the  work  of  the  Govern- 
ment and  entirely  for  the  benefit  of  the  governed. 
The  tendency  of  the  publicist  is  to  look  at  things 
from  below,  but  if  he  does  so  always  he  becomes 
at  last  nothing  but  a  contentious  fool.  If  he  is 
worth  anything  he  will  try  to  put  himself  in  the 
position  of  those  in  authority  and  inquire  what 
was  possible  and  practical  for  them  to  do  under 
given  circumstances.  Thus  Friedrich  Gentz  is 
a  sound  political  writer,  who  looked  at  things  in 
the  right  light.  Borne  is  the  opposite,  politically 
just  a  bungler. 

The  ideal  Government,  then,  would  be  the  one 
which  best  kept  the  middle  course  between  the 
two  extremes,  and  best  knew  how  to  reconcile 
the  two  equally  justifiable  but  equally  one-sided 
principles,  the  purely  political  and  the  purely 
social.  In  general  a  Conservative  Government 
inclines  towards  hardness  and  is  apt  to  exaggerate 
the  idea  of  the  strength  of  the  State.  On  the 
other  hand  a  Government  which  stands  for 
progress  will  yield  too  much,  and  pay  too  much 


PUBLIC  OPINION  141 

heed  to  social  needs.  It  will  compose  popular 
political  programmes  and  let  the  reins  of  authority 
slip  the  while. 

The  collective  mental  attitude  in  which  the 
mass  of  the  people  stand  towards  the  Administra- 
tion is  called  Public  Opinion,  but  the  exact 
meaning  of  this  idea  is  far  from  being  clearly 
understood.  The  saying  of  Napoleon  III., 
"  Public  opinion  is  the  sixth  great  Power,"  has 
become  a  favourite  weapon  of  the  demagogue, 
but  in  reality  the  public  opinion  of  whole  genera- 
tions has  been  completely  in  error  about  the  most 
important  political  questions  ;  take  the  Prussian 
Zollverein  once  more  as  a  single  instance.  Our 
political  unity  was  brought  about  in  defiance  of 
public  opinion,  which  only  began  to  veer  round 
after  the  whole  thing  was  done.  Therefore  we 
have  to  choose  among  the  thousands  of  desires 
and  imaginations  which  sway  the  masses  from  day 
to  day  and  which  may  so  often  be  mistaken. 
Great  crises  do  arise  in  a  nation's  history  when 
the  inward  conviction  of  the  people  breaks 
through  with  so  much  moral  force  behind  it 
that  no  Government  can  resist  it.  No  German 
Government  could  have  withstood  the  national 
cry  for  war  in  1870  ;  it  was  the  voice  of  the 
German  conscience  making  itself  heard.  But 
how  hard  these  matters  are  to  gauge  is  proved 
by  the  fact  that  the  French  felt  the  same.  They 
were  all  guilty  of  the  sin  which  they  afterwards 
fastened  upon  their  Emperor. 

The  best  way  of  judging  is  by  comparison  with 
the  aesthetic  instinct  of  the  public.  Grillparzer 
once  observed  that  he  hardly  ever  heard  any  good 


142      GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

criticism  of  the  theatre  from  an  individual, 
whereas  a  whole  audience  were  capable  of  giving 
it.  There  is  some  truth  in  this.  The  public  is 
the  final  judge  of  whether  a  drama  catches  hold 
of  the  inmost  heart ;  it  gives  the  collective 
verdict  which  is  right  in  the  long  run.  The  force 
of  public  opinion  in  the  State  is  the  same.  It 
often  errs,  but  often  the  universal  voice  speaks  so 
unanimously  that  "  Vox  populi,  vox  Dei "  may  be 
said  without  foolishness.  We  are  bound  to  admit 
that  the  war  of  1870  was  not  absolutely  light- 
minded  on  the  part  of  the  French.  Napoleon  III. 
had  made  the  country  a  first-class  power.  He 
had  given  it  a  position  in  Europe  which  neither 
French  diplomacy  nor  France  itself  was  inwardly 
capable  of  sustaining.  It  was  natural  that  they 
should  wish  to  check  the  rising  Empire  of  Ger- 
many, and  it  is  impossible  to  talk  of  the  absolute 
error  of  public  opinion. 

This  public  opinion  does  not  as  a  rule  come 
forward  as  a  united  whole,  but  is  first  seen  in  the 
opposing  forces  of  Party.  The  value  and  im- 
portance of  Party  varies  much ;  sometimes  it 
is  rated  too  low,  much  oftener  appraised  too 
highly,  both  for  good  and  evil.  Bacon  of  Verulam, 
whose  character  was  unfortunately  in  inverse 
proportion  to  his  greatness  as  a  thinker,  said 
that  only  the  humble  need  belong  to  a  party 
in  order  to  be  raised  by  it,  and  that  the  mighty 
require  it  no  longer.  He  therefore  despises 
Party,  and  totally  misapprehends  its  political 
significance.  Another  point  of  view  was  taken 
by  the  old  political  police  of  the  German  Con- 
federation, who  were  troubled  in  soul  by  every 


PARTIES  IN  THE  STATE  143 

party  which  arose,  and  saw  in  it  a  work  of  the 
Evil  One.  When  Heinrich  von  Gagern  spoke 
of  a  Government  Party  in  the  Darmstadt 
Chamber  in  the  year  1834,  the  Government  found 
the  epithet  so  injurious  that  they  dissolved  the 
Provincial  Diet. 

Radicalism,  on  the  other  hand,  paid  a  wild 
worship  to  Party  in  the  days  when  Herwegh  sang  : 

The  Party  was  crowned  with  my  laurels. 

This  was  a  particularly  unfortunate  combination 
of  ideas,  and  for  a  poet,  who  should  stand  above 
party,  it  was  no  less  than  downright  madness. 

An  unprejudiced  study  of  history  shows  that 
Party  is  a  political  necessity  for  a  free  people. 
It  draws  the  countless  opinions  of  individuals 
together  into  one  average,  and  crystallizes  the 
confused  judgment  of  each  into  definite  form. 
Although  it  is  a  wholesome  incentive  to  certain 
natures  to  be  compelled  to  range  themselves 
under  some  banner,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the 
terrorism  of  Party  may  also  do  harm.  For  it  is 
clear  that  every  party  must  be  one-sided.  There 
can  only  be  a  really  national  party  in  countries 
which  are  still  struggling  for  their  independence 
and  freedom  from  an  anti-nationaL  power.  So 
it  was  possible  in  1859  for  all  parties  in  Piedmont 
to  unite  under  Cavour's  leadership.  In  those 
days  that  great  man  was  able  to  carry  with  him 
every  faction  in  the  State,  for  all  laid  aside  their 
differences  for  the  common  task  of  the  unification 
of  Italy.  In  a  well-ordered,  independent  State 
no  national  party  will  exist.  The  name  national- 
liberal  is  a  masterly  invention,  so  well  sounding 


144  GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

that  it  pleases  everybody,  although  it  is  but  a 
name  and  nothing  more. 

Every  party  is  of  necessity  prejudiced  and 
short-lived  when  compared  with  the  breadth  of 
vision  and  allotted  span  of  the  State.  It  is  a 
chimera  to  try  to  construct  parties  to  endure 
for  ever.  Their  best  fate  is  to  disappear  with  the 
attainment  of  their  object,  their  most  shameful 
end  to  perish  because  the  facts  of  history  have 
proved  the  vanity  of  the  ends  for  which  they 
strove.  The  little  group  which  supported 
Hereditary  Imperialism,  which  had  been  so  often 
mocked  and  derided,  broke  up  in  1866  when  its 
dream  was  realised,  while  the  much  belauded 
party  of  Greater  Germany,  whose  very  name 
had  had  so  great  a  vogue,  received  a  mortal  blow 
at  the  same  time,  and  the  result  proved  that  its 
aims  were  inconsistent  and  untenable.  They 
were  so  completely  disposed  of  at  Koniggratz  that 
if  there  are  any  partizans  of  Greater  Germany 
to-day  they  do  not  proclaim  themselves  openly. 

Everything  vigorous  in  their  ideal  lives  on 
in  the  Ultramontane  party,  which  still  cherishes 
some  secret  leanings  towards  Austria,  although 
their  programme  is  on  the  whole  the  policy  of 
the  Church. 

Another  way  of  driving  the  theory  too  hard  is 
to  talk  of  fundamental  Party  forms  which  are  to 
exist  to  all  eternity.  Macaulay  went  astray  over 
this  when  he  asserted  that  all  parties  in  history 
were  divided  by  the  same  difference.  There 
would  always  be  one  side,  he  said,  to  enter  the 
lists  for  freedom  and  progress,  while  their  op- 
ponents would  be  guided  by  respect  for  authority 


WHIGS  AND   TORIES  145 

and  antiquity,  so  that  the  division  of  Whig  and 
Tory  would  be  found  everywhere.  In  spite  of 
the  pronounced  Anglomania  prevailing  at  that 
time  among  Continental  Liberals,  men  of  learning 
denounced  this  reasoning  both  in  Germany  and 
Italy. 

Macaulay's  teaching  was  followed  up  by  a 
new-fashioned  and  quite  perverse  German 
doctrine,  preached  by  the  late  Friedrich  Rohmer, 
who  played  so  singular  a  role  in  German  history. 
He  had  a  wonderful  gift  of  the  gab,  in  spite  of 
which  he  gathered  about  him  a  large  circle  of 
not  insignificant  people  who  followed  him  through 
thick  and  thin.  He  wrote  a  peculiar  book  about 
Four  Parties,  which  was  quite  worthless,  and  in 
which  he  describes  Radicals  as  the  boys  of 
Politics,  Liberals  as  the  youths,  Conservatives 
the  men,  and  Reactionaries  the  greybeards. 

There  is  nothing  behind  these  fanciful  prin- 
ciples except  that  self -worship  to  which  all 
parties  of  compromise  are  by  nature  inclined. 
It  is  not  the  idem  sentire  de  republica  which  draws 
parties  together  but  the  idem  velle.  Their 
essence  is  not  whether  they  seek  change  or  shun 
it,  but  in  what  it  is  that  they  desire  to  alter  or 
to  preserve.  Moreover,  Freedom  and  Authority 
are  correlated  not  opposing  forces.  Freedom 
reposes  upon  the  observance  of  laws  framed  in 
harmony  with  reason,  for  political  liberty  cannot 
dispense  with  the  authority  of  law.  The  con- 
flict of  the  two  great  English  parties  has  never 
been  one  of  principle  as  Macaulay  thought  it, 
but  always  turned  upon  who  should  hold  the  chief 
power  in  the  State.  Whigs  and  Tories  were 
VOL.  T  L 


146     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

both  drawn  from  the  aristocracy,  and  voted  for 
or  against  every  measure  according  to  whether 
they  were  in  or  out.  The  great  changes  in 
English  political  life  were  as  a  matter  of  fact 
mostly  the  work  of  the  Tories.  Therefore  it  is 
impossible  to  say  that  these  two  sections  of  the 
upper  classes,  who  both  desired  the  dominion  of 
Parliament  over  the  Crown,  were  sundered  by 
any  deep  divergence  of  principle.  They  are  in 
fact  the  best  illustration  of  how  it  is  the  struggle 
for  power  which  separates  parties.  Tories  and 
Whigs  were  originally  adherents  of  the  Stuarts 
on  one  side  and  of  the  usurping  Guelphs  upon 
the  other.  This  difference  gradually  closed,  but 
the  great  families  continued  to  abide  by  its 
inherited  tradition. 

This  long  continuance  of  the  same  parties 
can  naturally  only  happen  in  an  aristocratic 
State.  They  are  hidebound  to  a  degree  which 
is  very  irritating  to  the  average  free  man.  When 
Wellington  was  Prime  Minister,  and  saw  that 
Catholic  Emancipation  was  a  necessity,  he  de- 
cided upon  the  step  which  mortally  offended 
his  political  supporters.  German  opinion  would 
respect  a  man  who  could  shake  off  the  traditional 
party  fetters  for  the  good  of  the  country,  but  the 
English  view  is  that  although  it  may  have  been 
necessary  it  was  a  serious  offence  against  the 
ethics  of  party.  The  word  ethics  is  used  in  the 
same  ridiculous  sense  as  in  Germany  to-day. 
This  is  what  a  country  has  come  to  where  party 
feeling  is  in  the  very  air  they  breathe.  Both 
sides  fully  acquiesced  in  the  principle  of  the  new 
Constitution,  both  were  capable  of  governing,  and 


PARTIES  IN  GERMANY  147 

since  the  "  glorious  Revolution  "  and  the  ab- 
solutely illegal  accession  of  the  Guelphs  had 
reduced  the  Crown  to  a  nonentity,  parliamentary 
party  rule  had  become  a  necessity. 

The  English  Parliament  in  its  great  days  was 
the  worthy  counterpart  of  the  Roman  Senate. 
England  was  an  aristocratic  Republic  of  the 
great  style.  The  Crown  occupied  the  position  of 
"  an  expensive  but  otherwise  harmless  capital 
for  the  pillar  of  the  State,"  and  added  thereto 
was  the  hereditary  intellectual  nullity  of  the 
four  Georges.  An  aristocratic  government  by 
party  was  necessarily  rooted  in  the  whole  history 
of  the  State.  Its  rule  was  vigorous,  and  under 
it  England  became  a  commercial  power  of  the 
first  rank,  but  it  could  only  endure  so  long  as  the 
aristocracy  were  the  leading  class  in  the  country, 
and  recognized  as  such.  The  opening  of  the 
nineteenth  century  saw  the  slow  beginning  of 
the  change.  A  Reform  Bill  was  first  ventured 
in  1832,  an  extension  of  the  franchise  in  the  Lower 
House.  Thenceforward  a  quarter  of  its  members 
were  really  elected, — until  then  every  great  land- 
lord had  had  his  borough  in  his  pocket. 

Now  all  was  altered.  Part  of  the  House  of 
Commons  became  really  representative  of  the 
people,  and  the  new  interests  of  the  middle  classes 
found  expression  there.  The  Franchise  was  re- 
formed again  several  times,  and  now  the  names 
of  Whig  and  Tory  are  seldom  heard.  There  are 
no  longer  two  parties,  but  six  or  eight,  the  changes 
being  more  rapid  than  with  us.  England  has  no 
longer  possessed  merely  an  aristocratic  corpora- 
tion, since  the  Lower  House  has  become  approxi- 


148     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

mately  a  popular  Assembly.  It  is  as  motley  in  its 
composition  as  those  of  the  Continent,  although 
all  its  various  groups  range  themselves  according 
to  circumstances  under  two  leaders  only.  It  is 
clear  that  we  could  not  imitate  this  division  into 
two  hereditary  parties,  we  have  no  tradition  of 
it,  and  further  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  the 
German  character.  We  are  distinguished  from 
other  nations  by  our  honourable  love  for  out- 
spoken convictions,  which  would  make  a  cut-and- 
dried  party  system  distasteful  to  us.  We  refuse 
with  thanks  the  "  sacred  bond  of  friendship  " 
which  holds  English  parties  together.  We  would 
fain  distribute  the  offices  of  State  according  to 
merit,  an  ideal  which  is  very  hard  to  realise,  but 
is  dear  to  every  German  heart. 

Thus  English  party  rule  in  its  ancient  form 
can  never  be  a  model  for  ourselves,  although  it 
is  worthy  of  admiration  under  certain  historical 
conditions.  Moreover,  however  silly  the  squabbles 
of  our  factions  may  be  we  cannot  deny  that  all 
political  parties  have  a  backing  in  the  country. 
It  is  quite  impossible  to  discover  a  fixed  principle 
in  their  whirlpool,  and  we  must  above  all  beware 
of  the  conceited  modern  illusion  that  parties 
become  more  worthy  of  respect  as  their  culture 
increases,  and  that  in  the  course  of  history  they 
become  more  certain  of  their  own  nature  and 
aims.  Good  or  evil  as  they  were  in  the  past 
so  they  will  continue  to  be  in  the  future,  as  the 
astute  old  Wachsmuth  truly  said,  in  his  History 
of  Party.  If  the  State  belongs  to  the  world  of 
action,  parties  will  be  held  together  by  common 
aims  and  not  by  a  common  doctrine. 


REASONS  FOR  RISE   OF   PARTIES     149 

An  unprejudiced  observer  sees  how  the  occa- 
sions for  the  rise  of  a  new  party  are  as  many  as 
the  sands  of  the  sea.  Parties  are  the  ephemera 
of  free  political  life,  bred  of  the  clash  of  national, 
social,  and  religious  interests.  They  are  the 
necessary  means  by  which  the  average  will  of  a 
free  people  is  evolved  from  the  multitude  of 
individual  wills,  but  it  has  always  been  a  sign 
of  intellectual  barrenness  to  overrate  them.  To 
throw  in  our  lot  entirely  with  one  of  them  is  a 
deliberate  putting  on  of  fetters,  and  really  free 
natures  have  always  felt  a  certain  repulsion  from 
the  narrowness  of  party  judgments. 

Every  kind  of  party  may  be  a  disturber  of 
peace,  under  certain  conditions.  Social  factions 
may  lead  to  civil  war  because  they  are  swayed 
by  the  bases±_4iassioris.  The  power  of  envy  is 
incalculable,  especially  in  free  democratic  coun- 
tries, who  clutch  at  the  vision  of  equality  just 
because  it  is  false  and  because  the  proof  of  the 
inequality  of  men,  as  such,  meets  them  at  every 
turn.  Thus  a  feeling  of  envy  is  aroused  of  which 
inexperienced  youth  can  form  no  conception. 
We  can  only  gauge  its  depth  when  we  look  back 
in  riper  years  upon  our  own  achievements  where 
others  have  failed.  Many  of  the  institutions 
of  democracy  have  the  gratification  of  this  base 
passion  for  their  object.  Such  was  the  ostracism 
of  ancient  Athens.  Then  internal  discords  have 
often  led  to  the  downfall  of  a  State,  as  the  history 
of  Schleswig  -  Holstein  and  Denmark  shows. 
Again  the  cruel  story  of  the  Thirty  Years'  War 
proves  how  the  spirit  of  a  nation  can  be  devastated 
by  religious  party  strife. 


150     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

Social  interests  are  always  the  first  motives 
in  the  construction  of  a  party,  but  many  others 
are  added  to  them,  of  which  we  can  only  say  here 
that  this  form  of  expression  is  both  the  right  and 
the  duty  of  forces  which  are  tearing  a  nation 
inwardly  asunder.  If  a  sentiment  or  opinion  is 
strongly  held  in  any  given  district,  it  is  bound  to 
come  out.  Purely  territorial  and  ecclesiastical 
parties  have  always  an  incalculable  and  highly 
dangerous  element  within  them,  because  they  bias 
the  whole  of  public  life.  That  is  the  case  with 
our  Centre  Party.  It  is  fundamentally  without 
foundation  like  the  Church  of  Rome  itself.  The 
Pope's  dealings  with  every  Power  over  his  own 
vital  interests  are  simply  from  the  point  of  view 
of  their  utility  to  himself,  and  in  the  same  way 
the  baselessness  of  the  Centre  arises  from  its 
contempt  for  the  secular  State.  It  is  obvious 
that  such  parties  cannot  be  calculated  upon,  and 
particularly  to-day,  when  they  are  so  systemati- 
cally encouraged  from  above,  we  see  the  result 
in  the  terrible  tangle  of  opinions  prevailing.1 

We  may  call  the  construction  of  a  party 
natural  and  necessary  when  it  arises  out  of  some 
real  subject  of  dispute  either  in  economic, 
national,  or  religious  life.  Parties  are  diseased 
when  they  are  nourished  only  on  the  memory 
of  old  hatreds  and  discontents,  as  was  the 
German  so  -  called  free  -  thinking  group  in  the 
days  of  our  great  Chancellor.  These  people 
strove  towards  no  practical  political  goal,  they 
only  lived  on  the  grudge  they  bore  to  the  man 
who  was  greater  than  they,  and  whom  they  could 

1  Lecture  delivered  in  November  1892. 


LIBERTY  151 

not  forgive  for  existing.  We  have  to  concede  a 
great  power  in  history  to  the  forces  of  stupidity 
and  meanness.  Folly  will  always  have  its  ad- 
herents, because  the  majority  of  mankind  has 
been  gifted  with  it. 

In  all  this,  shines  clearly  the  old  truth  that  it 
is  the  duty  of  Government  to  stand  above 
parties,  and,  as  Bismarck  once  said,  to  find  their 
common  denominator.  If  the  State  truly  holds 
the  scales  of  justice  it  is  by  nature  impartial. 
Here  lies  the  moral  superiority  of  a  well-ordered 
monarchy  over  a  Republic.  Its  authority  is 
founded  upon  right,  and  can  be  independent  of 
party,  even  if  it  is  not  always  so.  In  Republics 
one  side  or  other  will  always  place  its  own 
representatives  in  power,  and  thus  hamper  the 
authority  of  the  State. 

Out  of  all  these  conflicting  currents  of  party 
what  we  call  public  opinion  emerges  at  last. 
The  first  demand  it  makes  of  the  State  and  of 
the  Government  is  always  for  freedom.  What 
must  we  understand  by  this  word  which  is  in 
itself  almost  meaningless  ?  We  have  to  ask 
further,  Freedom  from  what  ?  There  can  be 
but  one  answer :  Freedom  from  unreasonable 
compulsion.  True  freedom,  as  we  know,  consists 
in  the  passing  and  keeping  of  reasonable  laws 
in  which  the  individual  can  morally  acquiesce. 
The  ideas  of  lawful  authority  and  lawful  freedom 
are  not  contradictory.  No  freedom  could  be 
maintained  which  was  not  secured  by  universal 
obedience  to  law.  Thus  it  comes  about  that 
noble  nations  have  always  paid  honour  to  those 
who  serve  their  country. 


152     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

It  was  with  just  pride  that  the  Black  Prince 
bore  upon  his  shield,  below  the  ostrich  plumes, 
the  device  :  "I  am  the  first  subject  of  the  King 
of  England." 

If  we  dream,  like  the  Poles,  of  a  liberty  which 
casts  off  all  kinds  of  authority,  it  comes  to  much 
the  same  thing  as  the  total  disruption  of  the 
State.  Excess  of  freedom  is  no  more  than 
slavery,  for  when  no  check  is  set  upon  force  the 
weak  go  under  to  the  strong.  Freedom  stretched 
too  far  not  only  leads  to  serfdom,  but  is  serfdom 
in  itself.  Moreover,  we  Germans  are  far  too 
much  inclined  to  this  exaggerated  view  of  liberty. 
Formerly  the  freedom  of  the  Empire  was  said 
to  be  freedom  from  the  Empire  and  the  Emperor. 
Dominion  was  not  tolerated.  This  is  a  strong 
tendency  in  the  German  nation,  and  it  makes 
healthy  political  development  undeniably  diffi- 
cult. It  is  a  false  conception  which  seeks  for 
freedom  from  the  State  and  not  within  it. 

The  power  of  the  State  and  the  liberty  of  the 
people  are  inseparably  connected.  All  nations 
with  strong  political  instincts  deeply  resent  the 
disturbance  of  the  public  peace.  In  England 
the  penalty  of  political  crime  is  hard  to  the 
point  of  cruelty,  while  with  us  the  influence  of 
radical  ideas  has  created  a  certain  sympathy 
for  it,  particularly  in  polite  society. 

The  State  must  judge  of  such  crimes  by  their 
harmfulness,  not  by  the  purity  of  their  intention ; 
it  must  not  consider  whether  the  motive  was 
enthusiasm  or  baseness.  To  condone  them  is 
either  weak  sentimentality  or  a  sign  of  bad 
government  and  want  of  self-confidence.  The 


POLITICAL  LIBERTY  153 

German  slackness  in  these  matters  is  only 
excused  by  the  wretched  political  conditions  in 
which  we  lived  for  so  long. 

Aristotle's  definition  of  the  essence  of  liberty 
contained  a  deep  and  eternal  truth.  "  One 
ingredient  of  freedom,"  he  said,  "  is  either  to 
rule  or  to  be  ruled.  The  other  is  to  live  according 
to  our  own  desire."  In  other  words,  this  means 
that  the  first  part  of  liberty  consists  in  the 
participation  of  the  citizens  in  the  conduct  of 
the  State,  in  some  form  or  other,  or  political 
freedom  in  the  narrow  sense;  while  the  second 
involves  the  greatest  possible  scope  for  person- 
ality in  private  life.  These  parallel  aspects  of 
personal  and  political  freedom  run  through  all 
history,  and  it  is  important  for  the  character  of 
a  nation  or  a  period  to  ascertain  which  of  them 
is  being  actually  developed.  In  antiquity  the 
political  aspect  was  so  much  the  stronger  that 
it  astonishes  us  that  Aristotle  could  see  the  other 
at  all.  In  modern  times,  on  the  contrary,  the 
social  aspect  is  far  the  most  prominent.  The 
man  of  to-day  thinks  first  of  getting  scope  and 
protection  for  his  economic  activities,  and  the 
desire  to  co-operate  in  government  takes  the 
second  place.  The  ideal,  of  course,  is  a  com- 
bination of  the  two.  A  civilized  State  must 
give  full  play  both  to  civil  and  political  freedom, 
but  it  is  a  false  conception  which  finds  it  in 
self-assertion  uncontrolled  from  without. 

I  cannot  deal  exhaustively  with  the  subject 
of  political  freedom  until  I  treat  of  particular 
constitutional  forms.  I  will  only  say  generally 
that  the  course  of  history  shows  the  increase  in 


154     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

political  liberty  ;  a  growing  circle  takes  part  in 
the  work  of  government.  It  is  incontestable 
that  the  development  of  historic  life  becomes 
increasingly  democratic,  but  this  should  by  no 
means  lead  us  to  the  conclusion  that  the  last 
phase  of  a  fully  matured  State  must  be  a  Demo- 
cracy. It  is  a  fashionable  folly  of  the  present 
day  to  seek  for  political  freedom  in  particular 
constitutional  forms,  for  instance,  in  a  Con- 
stitutional Monarchy,  or  a  Republic.  We  have 
defined  Freedom  as  the  existence  and  mainten- 
ance of  reasonable  laws,  which  are  obeyed  by 
the  citizens  and  have  received  their  voluntary 
moral  sanction.  Clearly  therefore  it  was  not 
first  discovered  in  1789.  Such  a  vain  imagina- 
tion of  the  nineteenth  century  withers  before 
the  healthy  vigour  of  the  old  Monarchies  and 
Republics.  Why  should  we  deny  that  a  powerful 
military  State  like  Philip  of  Macedon's  was  free  ? 
Its  obedience  was  voluntary.  Or  shall  we  deny 
it  of  the  Government  of  the  great  Elector. 
Look  at  the  statue  on  the  "  Lange  Briicke." 
No  modern  man  can  fail  to  notice  that  the  noble 
and  gentle  Prince  who  welcomed  the  Huguenots 
into  Prussia  is  here  represented  with  four  fettered 
slaves.  This  is  a  product  of  the  seventeenth 
century  which  loved  the  idea  of  dominion  and 
was  never  tired  of  emblematic  representations 
of  submission.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  in  the 
days  of  the  great  Elector  the  pillar  of  freedom 
was  Absolutism.  Leibnitz,  Pufendorf,  Thom- 
asius ;  all  the  great  names  which  stood  for 
liberty,  the  men  to  whom  we  owe  the  re-awaken- 
ing of  Germany,  were  stern  Absolutists.  Who 


SELF-GOVERNMENT  155 

were  the  Reactionaries  in  those  days  ?  They 
were  the  champions  of  so-called  Freedom,  Konrad 
von  Burgsdorff  and  General  Kalkstein,  the 
upholders  of  traditional  divisions  and  class 
monopolies  which  would  have  enslaved  the  masses 
for  the  benefit  of  class  interests. 

It  is  clear  then  that  Freedom  is  not  essentially 
and  solely  founded  on  any  particular  form  of 
State.  The  glories  of  Constitutional  freedom 
are  nowhere  more  loudly  proclaimed  than  in 
Bulgaria  or  Greece,  but  these  countries  are  not 
therefore  more  free.  There  is  still  a  great  danger 
for  shallow  thinkers  in  this  idea  that  a  free 
State  is  a  State  framed  on  certain  constitutional 
lines.  There  was  a  time  when  Spain  and 
Portugal  were  held  to  be  freer  than  Prussia. 
What  has  resulted  of  all  their  liberty  ?  Who 
has  rivalled  these  nations  in  political  folly  ? 

This  much  only  is  capable  of  historical  proof. 
The  attributes  of  culture  and  prosperity,  upon 
which  ability  to  share  in  government  is  founded, 
spread  in  the  progress  of  civilization  in  ever- 
widening  circles  through  which  we  can  trace  a 
historical  law  of  the  democratization  of  Con- 
stitutional forms.  Active  participation  is  exer- 
cised by  an  increasing  number.  While  this 
increase  keeps  within  reasonable  limits,  every 
historian  must  acknowledge  that  there  are 
grounds  for  it,  but  unfortunately  we  in  Germany 
have  reached  in  universal  suffrage  the  utmost 
limits  beyond  which  unreason  cannot  stretch. 

It  follows  that  the  exercise  of  this  right  to 
vote  is  in  itself  no  political  education,  and  that 
political  freedom  has  far  less  place  in  it  than  in 


156    GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

an  unpretending  but  really  effective  share  in 
administration.  Much  depends  upon  whether 
a  nation  is  kept  in  leading  strings  in  the  matters 
which  touch  it  most,  or  whether  it  takes  an 
active  part  in  the  business  of  administration  ; 
this  important  question  is  not  decided  by  the 
form  in  which  the  central  government  resides. 

It  is  quite  obvious  that  all  local  government 
even  on  the  smallest  scale  is,  and  must  be, 
aristocratic.  It  is  not  possible  for  every  peasant 
to  undertake  the  office  of  Mayor ;  this  will  be 
filled  by  the  thriving  yeoman.  It  requires  the 
leisure  which  only  a  certain  prosperity  can  give. 
This  alone,  by  excluding  the  mass  of  the  popula- 
tion, modifies  the  law  which  tends  towards 
Democracy.  No  State  decree  can  alter  this 
social  necessity.  Should  it  ever  happen  that 
administration  is  no  longer  in  the  hands  of  the 
well-to-do,  but  of  the  masses,  the  world  will 
soon  revert  again  to  the  former  condition  of 
things.  A  certain  superiority  of  the  rulers  to 
the  ruled  is  inherent  in  all  government,  let  it 
come  through  education,  wealth,  birth,  or  what 
you  will. 

We  now  come  to  consider,  in  the  second  place, 
the  question  of  personal  freedom  ;  and  we  see 
that  the  individual  is  never  absolutely  free  to 
follow  his  own  bent.  If  he  is  a  member  of  the 
State  his  own  rights  must  be  dependent  upon 
its  collective  position.  If  its  very  existence  is  at 
stake,  as  in  war,  or  internal  disturbance,  every 
State  retains  the  power  to  suspend  the  personal 
rights  of  the  citizens.  It  cannot  do  otherwise. 
When  the  issues  are  vital  the  individual  must 


PERSONAL   LIBERTY  157 

subordinate   his   own  interests   to   those   of  his 
native  land. 

As  this  has  always  been,  so  it  will  always  be. 
Here  arises  a  well  -  known  disputed  point  in 
practical  legislation,  which  is  a  good  guide  to  the 
political  temper  of  different  nations.  Is  it  best 
to  bestow  discretionary  power  upon  the  admini- 
strative authorities  in  peace  time,  or  to  set  a 
limit  upon  it  as  a  general  rule,  and  from  time  to 
time  make  special  exceptions.  Germany  goes 
on  the  principle  of  not  putting  too  much  check 
on  discretionary  powers.  England,  on  the  other 
hand,  withholds  them  from  her  police  authorities, 
and  the  consequence  is  that  she  is  continually 
proclaiming  martial  law.1  No  year  passes  without 
the  Riot  Act  being  read  in  some  part  of  the 
United  Kingdom.  I  prefer  the  German  practice. 
Respect  for  law  is  less  disturbed  if  the  authorities 
have  discretionary  powers,  and  occasionally  exer- 
cise them,  than  if  the  whole  legal  machinery  is 
stopped  by  the  Riot  Act. 

If  we  examine  the  meaning  of  personal 
liberties  more  closely  we  see  that  there  is  nothing 
absolute  or  inherent  about  them.  They  are 
rather  the  result  of  the  long  and  difficult  develop- 
ment of  the  human  race.  That  was  the  mistake 
of  the  Natural  Law  doctrine  in  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries,  which  imagined  liberties 
innate  in  man.  But  it  is  evident  that  the  very 
earliest  conception  of  personal  freedom,  which 
was  inconsistent  with  slavery,  arose  in  historical 
times. 

Christianity  was  required  to  awaken  the  idea 

1  Translator's  note :  "  Belagerungszustand." 


158     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

of  the  value  of  human  personality.  Aristotle 
says  with  regard  to  slavery  that  it  is  not  strictly 
right  to  use  men  as  chattels,  but  since  there  are 
men  who  cannot  raise  themselves  above  the 
level  of  the  brutes,  they  must  be  treated  accord- 
ingly. Thus  even  the  most  independent  intellect 
of  its  time  could  not  raise  itself  to  the  point  of 
view  which  lies  at  the  very  foundation  of  Chris- 
tianity. It  is  an  illustration  of  the  brainlessness 
of  modern  Radicals,  that  they  are  for  ever 
abusing  Christianity,  and  do  not  realize  that  they 
have  to  thank  it  for  the  best  of  their  own  laws  of 
freedom.  Certain  aspects  of  liberty  are  indeed 
the  result  of  a  long  development,  and  even  the 
Christian  idea  of  brotherhood  in  God  was  slow 
to  unfold.  What  we  regard  as  absolute  to-day 
was  only  established  in  process  of  time.  The 
unending  evolution  of  Divine  reason  is  a  richer 
conception  than  the  barren  notion  of  an  absolute 
system  of  positive  right. 

But  it  is  easy  to  find  the  historical  reason 
why  such  a  Code  of  the  so-called  Rights  of  Man 
was  formulated  in  the  eighteenth  century.  The 
strict  subordination  of  personal  initiative  in  the 
seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  led  by  a 
natural  reaction  to  the  radical  theories  of  personal 
rights. 

Kant's  axiom  that  "  no  man  may  be  used  only 
as  a  means  to  an  end,"  contains  the  result  of  the 
metaphysical  fight  for  freedom  of  that  time. 
It  led  to  the  recognition  of  a  whole  series  of 
rights  of  the  individual.  As  is  well  known,  the 
American  Declaration  of  Independence  was  the 
first  attempt  made  to  express  them.  It  is  clear 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  MAN  159 

that  the  worthy  settlers,  thoroughly  sober- 
minded  men  of  business,  were  as  far  removed 
from  the  theories  of  moral  philosophy  as  from 
the  stars.  But  since  they  needed  the  support 
of  Europe  they  had  to  find  some  just  cause  for 
their  insurrection.  They  could  not  claim  the 
support  of  law,  which  was  on  the  side  of  England, 
and  they  had  no  intolerable  harshness  to  com- 
plain of.  They  wished  to  found  a  Revolution 
in  legality,  and  as  this  is  a  contradictio  in 
adjecto,  they  were  obliged  to  have  recourse 
to  the  laws  inalterably  written  in  the  stars,  etc. 
That  was  the  spirit  of  the  times,  such  catch- 
words were  required  and  did  in  fact  catch  hold 
in  Europe.  Such  phrases  were  what  drew  France 
into  the  American  War.  The  enlightened 
nobility  tempted  the  Crown  to  take  part.  The 
Marquis  de  Lafayette  hung  a  copy  of  the  Ameri- 
can Rights  of  Man  in  his  room,  and  beside  it  a 
blank  sheet,  bearing  the  title,  "  The  French 
Rights  of  Man." 

Thus  the  example  of  America  inflamed  the 
desire  in  France,  and  when  the  Revolution  broke 
out  the  first  cry  was  for  the  Droits  de  rhomme. 
In  the  limitless  exaltation  of  spirit  belonging  to 
the  early  days  of  revolutionary  propaganda 
Lafayette  started  the  idea  of  extending  these 
Rights  to  all  nations  upon  earth.  The  dream 
in  liberal  circles  was  to  see  every  free  people 
endowed  with  some  such  code.  From  this  re- 
sulted the  fundamental  rights  in  the  new  German 
Constitutions.  We  must  not  condemn  them 
unconditionally,  since  we  have  to  admit  that 
when  a  nation  has  gone  through  an  intellectual 


160  GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

transformation  it  feels  impelled  to  formulate  the 
result. 

The  Code  of  Rights  of  1848  therefore  cannot 
be  called  useless,  but  when  we  come  to  closer 
quarters  with  it  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Empire 
in  1849  we  find  that  it  is  a  piece  of  imperfect 
legislation,  as  the  juridical  terminus  technicus 
runs.  Here  also  the  axiom  holds  good,  "  No 
crime  without  penalty,  no  penalty  without  penal 
law."  Such  a  clause  as  the  following,  "  Science 
and  its  instruction  are  free,"  contains  no  legal 
meaning  at  all  by  itself,  but  only  acquires  it  in 
application  to  individual  cases,  by  creating 
precedent  for  the  penalty  to  be  inflicted  when  the 
principle  is  transgressed.  No  one  would  now 
maintain  that  such  an  axiom  would  abrogate 
all  existing  laws,  and  that  in  future  any  man 
can  establish  any  school  at  will.  It  is  only  a 
guiding  principle  for  the  direction  of  future  law- 
givers in  our  State,  for  without  compulsion  from 
the  State  there  is  no  effective  code.  All  these 
Codes  of  Rights  go  out  too  much  into  vague 
generalizations  ;  real  meaning  is  only  put  into 
them  by  practical  legislation  for  particular  cases. 
Nevertheless  it  is  safe  to  say  that  modern  civilized 
nations  have  made  for  themselves  a  whole  series 
of  Rights  of  Liberty  which  the  average  man 
regards  as  eternal  and  inviolable. 

When  we  come  to  particular  inquiries  as  to 
what  the  rights  of  the  individual  really  are,  we 
find  the  first  claim  is  for  protection  of  the  purely 
physical  existence.  This  is  so  carefully  practised 
by  the  modern  State  that  it  even  punishes  injury 
to  the  unborn  child.  Certain  Radical  theorists 


SLAVERY  161 

maintain  that  the  abolition  of  capital  punishment 
is  the  logical  sequence  of  this  right.  But  if  the 
State  has  the  power  to  send  the  flower  of  its 
manhood  to  die  in  thousands  for  the  sake  of  the 
lives  of  the  whole  community,  it  would  be  absurd 
to  deny  it  the  right  to  put  criminals  to  death  if 
they  are  a  danger  to  the  public  weal.  All  civil 
freedom  is  limited  and  liable  to  be  forfeited  if  it 
is  abused.  The  death  penalty  is  no  violation  of 
the  rights  of  humanity  if  the  State  thinks  it  well 
to  inflict  it,  nor  is  corporal  punishment,  which  is 
in  fact  a  necessity  in  certain  stages  of  civilization. 
But  the  abolition  of  bodily  mutilation  is  a 
proper  consequence  of  the  respect  which  is  now 
paid  to  the  physical  personality.  Such  punish- 
ments, once  removed,  never  return.  Here  is  a 
sure  test,  for  what  has  been  condemned  by  the 
public  conscience  never  reappears.  The  rack  is 
gone  for  ever,  the  death  penalty,  on  the  other 
hand,  has  always  returned,  and  it  will  always 
remain.  We  have  become  sensitive  to  the  point 
of  sentimentality  upon  these  matters.  Flogging 
would  be  very  advisable  in  certain  cases  to-day, 
and  it  is  a  real  misfortune  that  we  have  banished 
the  pillory.  If  a  fraudulent  speculator  could  be 
placed  in  it  publicly  nowadays  it  would  have  a 
far  better  effect  than  a  long  term  of  imprisonment. 
The  recognition  of  the  legal  rights  of  the 
individual  follows  naturally  upon  the  conception 
of  the  free  personality.  Hence  it  comes  that  the 
penalty  of  so-called  civil  death  pronounced  upon 
a  living  man  is  not  consonant  with  our  conception 
of  justice.  Therefore  this  punishment  has  been 
done  away  with  nearly  everywhere  and  is  not 

VOL.   I  M 


162     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

likely  to  recur.  But  the  acknowledgment  of 
the  legal  rights  of  all  citizens  before  the  judge 
does  not  involve  their  equality  in  the  eye  of  law, 
which  makes,  for  instance,  a  proper  distinction 
between  young  and  old,  men  and  women,  officials 
and  ordinary  citizens. 

If  we  admit  that  personality  constitutes  a 
person  in  the  legal  sense,  slavery  and  serfdom 
are  abolished  naturally  and  once  and  for  all. 
The  introduction  of  slavery  in  the  very  earliest 
times  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the  greatest 
advances  in  human  civilization.  It  brought  the 
ghastly  wholesale  slaughter  in  war  to  an  end, 
and  made  economic  progress  possible.  The 
working  power  of  the  slave  was  husbanded  as 
far  as  it  could  be,  so  long  as  human  labour 
possessed  a  high  value.  But  as  civilization 
increased  slavery  became  harder,  both  relatively 
and  absolutely.  This  was  bound  to  lead  to  a 
strong  reaction,  and  speaking  generally  we  may 
bless  the  consequences  of  the  French  Revolution, 
and  the  legislation  of  Stein  and  Hardenberg, 
which  liberated  the  serfs.  We  may  say  as  much 
for  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  plantations  by 
England.  England's  first  thought  was  in  reality 
the  destruction  of  colonial  competition,  but  the 
movement  was  necessary  in  itself,  and  the  only 
misfortune  was  that  it  was  so  precipitate.  North 
America  was  too  hasty  with  her  complete  eman- 
cipation, but  here  there  is  nothing  to  deplore  ; 
it  gave  rise  to  a  great  war,  and  war  should  always 
cut  at  the  roots  of  a  quarrel. 

The  abolition  of  personal  bondage  makes 
the  existence  of  the  monastic  orders  inconsistent 


THE  RIGHTS  OF  THE  SUBJECT     163 

with  a  modern  Constitutional  State.  The  com- 
plete slavery  within  these  institutions  of  the 
Catholic  Church  is  no  longer  thinkable  for 
humanity.  The  monks  and  nuns  have  surren- 
dered their  individuality,  and,  as  our  old  wording 
has  it,  they  have  ceased  to  be  persons.  They 
have  given  up  their  possessions  and  their  whole 
status  in  civil  life,  and  desire  only  to  remain 
serviceable  members  of  their  Cloister  community. 
This  is  fundamentally  inconsistent  with  the  laws 
of  a  modern  State,  which  prohibits  voluntary 
entrance  into  slavery  or  personal  bondage,  and 
maintains  for  its  institutions  what  its  citizens 
demand  for  themselves.  The  State  is  only  con- 
cerned with  the  outward  regulation  of  men's 
lives,  and  does  not  inquire  into  motives  ;  it  is 
indifferent  to  whether  a  man  becomes  a  slave 
for  religious  reasons  or  because  he  has  gambled 
away  his  patrimony.  The  personal  freedom 
which  the  State  guarantees  for  all  its  subjects 
has  been  infringed  in  both  cases,  and  the  offence 
is  punishable.  We  must  fix  this  guiding  prin- 
ciple in  our  minds  in  order  to  fathom  the  sophistry 
of  the  clerical  party,  when  it  talks  of  the  Rights 
of  the  Church.  We  must  declare  that  cloisters 
are  not  lawful  in  a  State  which  regards  personal 
liberty  as  a  conditio  sine  qua  non,  and  that  they 
are  permitted  to  exist  as  an  exception,  not  as  a 
rule.  This  is  the  correct  standpoint.  Such  in- 
stitutions are  radically  opposed  to  the  principles 
which  frame  the  laws  of  a  modern  State.  The 
State  may  make  exceptions,  but  there  should 
be  no  mistake  that  such  they  are,  and  that  the 
permission  of  them  may  be  withdrawn  at  any 


164     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

time.  It  is  not  advisable  to  allow  what  is 
unlawful  to  grow  beyond  control. 

Assurance  against  capricious  arrest  is  another 
essential  part  of  the  conception  of  personal 
freedom.  In  this  England  most  eagerly  led 
the  van.  There  is  a  celebrated  clause  in  Magna 
Charta,  solemnly  sworn  to  again  in  the  protective 
Statutes  of  King  Edward's  reign,  which  provides 
that  no  one  shall  be  imprisoned  until  after  the 
judge's  verdict.  This  was  doubtless  a  great 
achievement,  but  it  is  no  less  certain  that  in 
modern  capital  cities  this  law  is  antiquated. 
In  a  well-ordered  State,  where  over-zeal  on  the 
part  of  the  police  is  severely  punished,  and 
where  we  can  therefore  depend  upon  their  sense 
of  responsibility,  it  is  essential  for  them  to  have 
the  right  of  entry  into  houses.  It  is  obviously 
ridiculous  that  brothels  and  haunts  of  thieves 
should  be  considered  sacred  ground.  The  result 
of  this  in  London  is  that  horrible  crimes  go 
undiscovered.  Or  look  at  the  tragi-comic  occur- 
rence in  Ireland  some  years  ago.  One  of  the 
Irish  malcontents,  whose  only  desire  was  to 
stir  up  rebellion  against  the  Queen,  was  con- 
victed of  high  treason.  The  police  were  upon 
his  tracks  when  he  took  refuge  in  his  so-called 
castle,  a  tumble-down  old  tower.  Here  he  was 
secure.  From  time  to  time  he  let  himself  down 
by  a  rope  to  the  first  story,  and  thence  delivered 
an  inflammatory  oration,  to  which  the  police 
had  to  listen  in  silence. 

We  are  always  brought  back  to  the  same 
fundamental  principle  that  personal  liberty  can- 
not be  an  absolute  right,  but  must  be  limited 


THE  RIGHT  TO  WORK  165 

by  the  conditions  existing  in  the  State  itself. 
It  is  impossible  for  the  State  to  secure  order  in 
the  great  towns  if  the  liberty  of  the  subject  is 
so  widely  interpreted.  It  is  sufficient  for  the 
security  of  a  reasonable  personal  freedom  that 
the  person  arrested  should  be  brought  to  trial 
within  a  given  period,  and  is  told  of  what  he  is 
accused.  Moreover,  it  is  essential  that  there 
should  be  a  penalty  for  the  overstepping  of 
authority  on  the  part  of  the  police.  Their  dis- 
cretionary powers  should  be  kept  within  their 
natural  limits  by  the  right  of  every  person, 
who  considers  himself  injured,  to  complain  and 
demand  the  punishment  of  the  too  -  zealous 
official.  Some  method  for  doing  this  legally 
must  be  provided,  but  it  is  difficult  to  frame 
a  law  against  capricious  arrest  without  robbing 
the  executive  of  too  much  of  their  initiative. 

The  next  part  of  the  definition  of  personal 
freedom,  taken  in  its  modern  sense,  is  the  right 
to  use  all  the  physical  and  mental  powers  in  any 
form  of  economic  production ;  or,  to  express 
it  negatively,  that  no  one  should  be  prevented 
by  the  State  from  earning  his  bread  in  any 
honest  manner.  But  this  right  clearly  cannot 
be  absolute.  Every  constituted  State  must  have 
some  voice  in  the  organization  of  industry, 
and  will  impose  certain  conditions,  the  formation 
of  guilds  or  the  granting  of  concessions.  More- 
over, there  are  some  industries  which  are  worked 
to  the  common  danger  in  incapable  hands.  The 
building  trade  is  not  absolutely  free  in  any 
State  in  the  world,  but  has  to  conform  to  certain 
regulations. 


166     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

On  the  other  hand,  this  right  to  free  labour 
is  capable  of  a  positive  extension,  which  we  see 
gradually  approaching  at  the  present  day.  If 
it  is  agreed  that  every  man  has  the  right  to  gain 
an  honest  living,  the  next  deduction  may  be  the 
positive  right  to  work.  We  see  at  once  how 
dangerous  and  how  easily  abused  this  right 
would  be,  but  in  face  of  the  great  peril  arising 
from  the  industrial  forces  in  modern  times  it 
is  not  possible  to  refuse  it  absolutely.  The 
State  must  see  that  work  is  forthcoming  for 
those  who  are  honestly  seeking  it,  and  must 
also  care  for  the  physically  unfit  in  some  way 
or  another.  The  right  to  work  is  one  of  the 
most  difficult  practical  problems  of  personal 
freedom  ;  nor  is  it  one  of  those  rights  which  are 
universally  recognized,  for  many  educated  people 
deny  it  utterly.  This  conception  is  still  ex- 
panding, for  all  rights  are  in  a  state  of  perpetual 
growth. 

We  come  to  the  next  step  in  the  recognition 
of  human  rights — in  the  freedom  of  the  reason- 
able man  to  give  expression  to  his  opinions  and 
convictions.  This  brings  us,  in  our  period  of 
civilization  and  over-civilization,  at  once  to 
consider  the  right  of  liberty  for  the  Press. 

Upon  the  Continent  freedom  of  the  Press  has 
been  made  a  fundamental  principle  in  all  political 
Constitutions,  but  we  must  not  lightly  assume 
that  it  necessarily  includes  the  free  expression 
of  opinion.  Every  man  may  speak  the  truth, 
and  the  State  must  not  prevent  him,  but  Truth 
is  a  subjective  conception,  and  the  right  to  declare 
it  openly  is  accompanied  by  the  no  less  binding 


FREEDOM  OF  THE  PRESS          167 

duty  to  refrain  from  doing  public  harm  by  the 
spoken  word. 

The  right  to  strengthen  that  spoken  word 
a  thousandfold  through  print  by  no  means 
follows  from  the  right  to  speak  the  truth  ;  nor 
is  the  right  of  absolute  freedom  for  the  Press  a 
necessary  consequence  of  the  freedom  of  the 
individual.  Here,  too,  we  must  consider  the 
question  as  a  whole,  and  examine  the  character 
of  a  modern  State.  Any  discerning  Government 
would  admit  that  open  criticism  was  an  advantage 
in  the  long  run,  however  much  the  Press  may 
have  been  a  thorn  in  their  side.  It  is  essential 
for  a  Government  to  keep  in  touch  with  public 
opinion.  Let  us  remember  the  famous  decision 
of  the  Supreme  Court  in  Berlin  in  the  days  of 
Frederick  William  II.  An  indictment  was 
brought  against  some  publication  which  had 
criticized  the  King  with  great  severity.  The 
Court  held  that  it  would  be  an  insult  to  his 
Majesty  to  pronounce  such  a  pamphlet  dangerous. 
A  Government  whose  conscience  is  clear  must, 
in  fact,  welcome  public  criticism. 

The  wish  of  the  individual  to  express  his 
opinion  freely  is  a  secondary  point.  This  per- 
sonal desire,  like  all  others,  is  very  definitely 
subordinate  to  the  conflicting  duties  towards 
the  community.  For  a  long  time  this  right 
was  fettered  by  the  power  of  the  Church.  The 
censorship  is  of  Papal  origin,  set  up  in  fact  by 
Alexander  VI.  when  the  humanistic  ideas  began 
to  make  headway.  Later,  in  the  Wars  of 
Religion,  it  was  most  actively  employed  on  one 
side  and  the  other,  and  then  taken  over  by  the 


168     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

State  for  political  purposes.  It  was  England 
which  led  the  way  to  a  freer  development.  Milton 
composed  his  magnificent  Areopagitica,  the  finest 
defence  for  liberty  of  the  Press  which  has  ever 
been  written.  Thus  in  England  the  Censor  was 
early  abolished,  although  this  did  not  lead  to 
any  complete  freedom  for  the  Press.  It  was 
still  in  the  power  of  an  unscrupulous  Govern- 
ment to  arraign  the  author  of  an  inconvenient 
libel.  He  must  indeed  be  brought  before  a  jury, 
but  only  to  decide  upon  the  question  of  author- 
ship. It  was  not  until  shortly  before  the  French 
Revolution  that  the  Court  was  empowered  to 
pronounce  whether  a  book  was  a  punishable 
libel.  From  that  time  forward  the  Press-prosecu- 
tions gradually  ceased,  and  finally  disappeared 
completely. 

It  is  most  important  to  cherish  no  illusions 
as  to  the  functions  of  the  Press. 

The  daily  Press  in  particular,  from  whom 
serious  and  considered  judgments  cannot  be 
expected,  is  essentially  superficial.  It  cannot 
be  a  creative  force,  but  it  brings  such  forces  to 
the  public  notice.  It  gives  prominence  to  desires 
and  passions  already  existing  among  the  people, 
and  it  can  invest  them  at  times  with  an  appalling 
power. 

When  it  trumpets  these  interests  with  all 
the  shameless  influence  of  the  printed  word 
it  can  make  itself  a  real  public  force. 

Add  to  this  the  horrible  abuse  of  anonymity, 
whose  consequences  cannot  be  too  strongly  con- 
demned. What  an  error  it  was  to  suppose  that 
a  free  Press  would  be  an  instrument  for  educating 


169 

the  public  judgment !  It  has  rather  become 
a  school  for  moral  cowardice.  When  the  first 
attempt  to  introduce  it  into  a  still  innocent 
Germany  was  made  after  1815,  all  liberal  opinion 
was  in  its  favour,  on  the  ground  that  in  a  free 
Press  every  article  should  be  signed  by  its  author's 
name.  But  we  let  slip  the  proper  opportunity  of 
carrying  out  this  principle.  Then,  after  the 
Karlsbad  decision,  came  the  shocking  mal- 
treatment of  the  Press  by  confiscation,  etc. 
Anonymity  became  necessary  for  self-protection, 
and  the  blame  lies  at  the  door  of  the  Government. 
Our  feelings  about  this  moral  pest  are  similar 
to  those  of  the  Oriental  with  regard  to  the  actual 
physical  plague. 

When  the  simple-minded  reader  sees  in  his 
newspaper  some  sentence  beginning,  "  Let  Russia 
be  warned,"  his  fancy  pictures  some  daemonic 
power,  but  if  he  were  aware  that  there  was 
nobody  in  the  background  except  Veitel  Itzig 
or  Christian  Miiller,  the  words  would  only  make 
him  smile.  The  mere  fact  of  anonymity  creates 
an  uncanny  impression  upon  uneducated  people. 
It  is  everywhere  considered  mean  and  cowardly 
in  a  man  to  seek  refuge  behind  it  from  responsi- 
bility for  his  own  words.  That  which  is  dis- 
honourable to  the  individual  cannot  be  whole- 
some in  public  life.  This  applies  all  the  more 
to  the  Press  because  the  moral  responsibility 
is  greater  in  proportion  to  the  power  and  the 
wide  dissemination  of  what  is  said.  We  feel 
then  reminded  of  a  madhouse  when  we  see  men 
employed  in  dragging  all  secrets  to  the  light 
while  they  remain  concealed  themselves.  Public 


170  GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

opinion  is  thereby  corrupted  beyond  expression. 
You,  who  hear  me  now,  will  later  on  have  more 
experience,  and  will  stand  above  the  average 
opinions  of  our  time ;  you  will  understand 
then  that  this  nineteenth  century,  now  drawing 
to  its  close,  has  not  upheld  a  high  standard  of 
public  morality.  It  is  an  age  of  money-grubbing, 
and  it  will  take  a  low  place  in  history.  We  are 
dealing  now  with  facts  as  they  are,  and  we  find 
that  the  man  of  to-day  would  as  soon  do  without 
his  daily  bread  as  give  up  his  daily  newspaper  ; 
its  garbage  has  become  his  necessary  nourish- 
ment. We  must  therefore  start  from  the  simple 
thesis  that  the  modern  State  requires  the  free 
public  discussion  of  all  social  and  political  ques- 
tions, and  that  the  indiscretions  of  the  free 
Press  are  less  harmful  than  the  danger  of  the 
deep-rooted  embitterment  of  men  whose  mouths 
are  closed. 

The  State  of  course  can,  and  may,  attempt 
to  curb  the  excesses  of  free  speech,  and  may 
adopt  either  preventive  or  repressive  measures 
to  do  this.  The  first  course,  as  we  all  know, 
has  been  tried  for  centuries  through  the  Censor- 
ship. It  is  enough  to  say  that  the  Censor  was 
invented  by  the  Papacy.  The  office  is  tyrannical 
in  its  very  essence,  and  the  working  of  it  is  highly 
dangerous  for  the  State  itself,  as  long  experience 
has  proved  by  the  bitterness  which  it  arouses. 
A  State  which  has  a  Censor  tacitly  admits  that 
every  publication  appearing  within  its  territories 
expresses  its  own  opinion,  it  undertakes  a  re- 
sponsibility for  all  printed  matter  which  is  im- 
possible to  sustain.  The  office  of  Censor  has 


ADVERTISEMENTS.     JOURNALISTS    171 

always  been  so  heartily  detested  that  its  bearers, 
with  the  exception  of  the  priests,  have  almost 
all  been  men  of  evil  character.  In  the  period 
before  1848  a  certain  fourth-rate  professor  dwelt 
in  Leipsic  and  exercised  the  Censorship.  He 
denied  fair  treatment  to  many,  including  the 
Gottingen  Seven,  who  counted  such  men  as 
Dahlmann  and  Jacob  Grimm  among  their  number. 
Stupidity  and  mediocrity  interfered  capriciously, 
and  created  much  ill-feeling.  Moreover,  men 
soon  learned  under  the  Censor  to  use  a  certain 
veiled  style  of  writing,  where  hints  and  allusions 
worked  far  more  poisonously  than  any  free  open 
attack.  Censorship  is  so  generally  condemned 
to-day  that  it  will  never  be  set  up  again. 

There  are  obviously  other  preventive  measures 
possible  for  the  State,  such  as  the  forfeiture  of 
money  guarantees.  Unfortunately  this  weapon 
also  is  a  clumsy  one,  because  the  most  offend- 
ing newspapers  are  also  the  richest,  and  are 
invulnerable  to  this  method  of  attack.  "The 
modern  Press  is,  indeed,  Janus-headed.  Next  to 
anonymity,  its  second  deeply- rooted  abuse  is  the 
totally  unnatural  connection  between  its  political 
function,  which  is  the  treatment  and  dissemina- 
tion of  the  views  of  a  particular  party,  and  the 
business  of  advertisement.  It  is  perfectly  plain 
that  there  is  no  inherent  bond  between  politics 
and  the  trade  notices  of  this  or  that  tailor  or 
bootmaker.  Nay  more.  The  monopoly  of  ad- 
vertisements was  once  the  property  of  the  State, 
but  in  Prussia  it  was  allowed  to  lapse,  and  the 
business  of  advertisement  has  now  become  so 
closely  united  with  the  political  party  journals 


172     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

that  it  appears  to  be  impossible  to  alter  it. 
Advertisements  have  become  the  very  founda- 
tions of  our  newspapers,  for  none  of  them  can 
even  approximately  cover  the  cost  of  production 
through  the  profits  of  sale  alone ;  while  in  the 
matter  of  advertisement  it  is  precisely  those 
newspapers  which  are  most  despicable  and 
morally  depraved  which  obtain  the  most  success. 
They  employ  any  means  of  obtaining  them, 
and  make  it  a  rule  to  pander  to  the  lowest  tastes 
and  the  meanest  instincts  of  the  public.  There 
are  many  decent  people  who  heartily  despise 
their  newspaper,  but  are  still  obliged  to  go  on 
reading  it.  Thus  the  worst  journals  have  the 
largest  circulation,  and  are  so  rich  that  the 
imposition  of  a  fine  of  a  couple  of  thousand 
marks  is  no  deterrent  at  all. 

The  idea  of  instituting  an  examination  for 
journalists  has  occurred  to  some  worthy  folk. 
The  English  are  right  in  saying  that  the  Germans 
are  an  astonishing  nation,  for  one-half  of  them 
are  always  engaged  in  examining  the  rest.  It 
is  a  Chinese  shibboleth  with  our  professors 
that  manly  dignity  is  only  to  be  attained  through 
examinations.  It  would  be  interesting  to  dis- 
cover the  proposed  form  which  this  journalistic 
examination  should  assume.  There  is  a  mass 
of  news-sheets  in  the  provinces  whose  preparation 
requires  nothing  more  than  a  piece  of  clean 
paper  and  the  knowledge  of  reading  and  writing. 
The  examination  for  them  would,  therefore,  be 
for  proficiency  in  the  aforesaid  knowledge;  or 
should  there  be  a  different  test  set  for  large 
newspapers  and  small  ones  ?  The  proposal  does 


PRESS  PROSECUTIONS  173 

not  touch  the  root  of  the  matter,  for  it  starts 
from  the  wrong  end,  and  assumes  that  virtue 
is  the  product  of  intelligence.  There  are  men  of 
integrity  and  honour  among  our  journalists 
who  deserve  our  respect  only  because  they  have 
kept  themselves  so  honest  in  such  an  atmosphere. 
The  majority,  however,  are  of  the  Catiline  order, 
men  who,  as  Bismarck  said,  would  never  have 
got  on  in  any  other  walk  of  life.  No  examination 
would  succeed  in  excluding  these,  for  they 
are  particularly  well  provided  with  the  required 
intelligence.  We  must,  unfortunately,  come  to 
the  conclusion  that  in  a  free  State  a  better 
appreciation  of  moral  values  on  the  part  of  the 
public  is  the  only  way  in  which  an  unworthy 
press  can  be  made  to  reap  the  contempt  which  it 
deserves. 

In  cases  of  urgent  danger  our  Press  law  gives 
the  police  the  right  of  temporary  confiscation. 
Here  once  more  we  touch  a  point  of  dispute 
between  England  and  Germany.  Is  it  best  to 
confer  discretionary  power  upon  the  police  officials, 
only  to  be  practically  enforced  in  times  of  unrest, 
or  should  these  powers  be  withheld,  and  dis- 
turbance dealt  with  by  martial  law  ?  Every 
State  must  adopt  one  of  these  two  alternatives, 
because  all  political  freedom  must  be  limited. 
The  Germans  have  chosen  the  first  -  mentioned 
plan,  the  English  the  second.  The  consequence 
is,  as  we  have  seen  already,  that  the  proclamation 
of  a  condition  of  war  is  much  commoner  with 
them  than  with  us.  The  German  method  is  the 
right  one  here  ;  there  is  no  necessity  in  an  orderly 
State  to  treat  the  police  with  an  absolute  lack  of 


174     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

confidence.  It  is,  however,  clear  that  this  right 
of  confiscation  can  seldom  be  exercised,  and  in 
most  cases  would  not  be  effective.  We  are 
therefore  driven  to  the  conclusion  that  up  till 
the  present  no  reliable  preventive  measures  have 
been  found  against  a  really  free  Press. 

There  remains  then  only  the  punishment  for 
errors  and  crimes  committed  by  the  Press.  All 
legislation  for  this  must  be  grounded  on  the 
principle  that  these  offences  are  not  delicta  sui 
generis,  but  are  many  and  various,  committed 
through  the  Press. 

Blasphemy  remains  blasphemy,  and  lese- 
majeste  does  not  alter  its  character,  whether  they 
be  committed  by  word  or  deed  or  through  print, 
the  only  difference  being  that  blasphemy  reaches 
farther  when  printed  and  read  by  thousands  than 
if  uttered  by  word  of  mouth.  But  the  verdict 
must  not  be  influenced  by  intention.  The  State 
has  no  ground  for  judging  the  man  who  insults 
God  in  the  newspapers  differently  from  the  man 
who  shouts  his  blasphemy  in  the  streets.  There- 
fore the  Press  must  not  be  arraigned  before  a 
jury,  except  for  serious  crimes.  This  unwelcome 
truth  is  a  result  of  the  principle  of  perfect  equality 
before  the  judge,  which  must  apply  equally  when 
it  is  to  the  disadvantage  of  the  Press. 

Furthermore,  the  Press  must  not  be  immune 
from  the  obligation  to  give  evidence.  Exception 
must  be  made  if  a  transgression  has  been  com- 
mitted by  means  of  the  Press  of  a  kind  which 
could  not  have  been  committed  by  journalists. 
If  the  publication  of  an  official  secret  clearly 
points  to  the  responsibility  of  some  official  for 


CRITICISM  OF  NEWSPAPERS        175 

its  betrayal,  the  law  should  have  power  to  arrest 
the  editor  in  order  to  obtain  his  evidence.  But 
if  the  right  to  compel  evidence  be  conceded,  the 
editor  shall  not  be  held  responsible  for  the  de- 
linquency of  another,  any  more  than  I  take  upon 
myself  the  murder  or  theft  which  I  have  not 
committed.  In  considering  all  such  problems  we 
must  bear  in  mind  that  it  is  very  often  nothing 
more  than  a  colossal  egotism  and  love  of  notoriety 
which  masquerades  in  the  guise  of  public  opinion. 

With  all  this  we  are  still  not  secured  against 
the  mischievous  action  of  the  Press.  The  result 
of  legal  proceedings  very  rarely  produces  any 
universal  or  unanimous  impression.  Such  law- 
suits are  seldom  decided  in  favour  of  the  plaintiff, 
as  the  points  raised  are  rather  of  a  subjective 
kind. 

Therefore  it  is  not  conducive  to  the  dignity 
of  the  State  when  high  officials  institute  libel 
actions  too  frequently.  A  thick  skin  is  the  firstl 
necessity  for  a  modern  statesman.  Cavour  was 
a  model  in  this  respect,  for  he  was  perfectly  in- 
different to  all  unfriendly  attack  in  the  opposition 
Press. 

The  hope  that  journalism  would  be  its  own 
remedy  has  proved  as  illusive  as  the  other  hope 
which  expected  fair  prices  to  follow  automatically 
upon  Free  Trade.  Meanness  and  stupidity  are 
all  too  often  stronger  than  integrity  and  common 
sense.  It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  the  freedom 
of  the  Press  has  not  brought  the  blessings  in  its 
train  which  enthusiasts  once  looked  for,  but  we 
must  maintain  a  scientific  impartiality,  and  not 
ask  of  it  more  than  it  can  perform.  We  must 


176     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

say  without  prejudice  that  its  function  is  not  to 
instruct,  but  to  give  the  news,  and  as  regards 
intention  to  bring  to  public  notice  the  different 
interests  which  animate  the  people.  Such  a 
class  of  newsmongers  are  indispensable  in  a 
time  where  active  intercourse  makes  publicity 
a  necessity. 

Its  inevitable  corollary  is  the  undeniably 
devastating  influence  of  newspapers  upon  in- 
dividual culture.  The  calm  verdict  of  later  times 
upon  our  century  will  be  guided  by  two  symp- 
toms ;  the  mountain  of  waste  paper  which  we 
have  accumulated  under  the  title  of  newspapers 
will  be  regarded  with  as  much  disgust  as  the 
asinine  character  of  much  of  our  literature.  It 
is  impossible  to  express  how  far  our  society  owes 
its  intellectual  sterility  to  the  Press.  The  danger 
was  foreseen  by  old  Goethe.  The  Press  now 
provides  all  the  information  which  was  formerly 
carried  from  mouth  to  mouth,  and  it  supplies 
thousands  with  the  same  daily  nourishment. 
Most  of  it  is  immediately  forgotten,  the  second 
edition  wipes  out  the  memory  of  the  first,  and 
nothing  remains  except  scandal,  and  vulgar 
jokes. 

Our  letter- writing  is  a  good  indication  of  the 
universal  emptiness  of  mind.  The  test  of  the 
cultivation  of  a  period  lies  in  the  value  of  what 
is  said  rather  than  in  rapidity  of  correspondence. 
Speed  and  cheapness  of  postage  have  made  our 
letters  so  terribly  poverty-stricken  that  the 
brilliant  and  witty  letters  of  former  times 
have  vanished.  In  addition,  there  is  the  pre- 
vailing idea  of  the  nineteenth  century,  which 


TOLERATION  177 

is  already  making  its  way  into  the  Prussian 
system  of  education,  that  the  human  ideal  is 
to  be  a  walking  encyclopedia.  It  is  thought  to 
be  unbecoming  and  a  sign  of  lack  of  education 
to  be  unable  to  converse  upon  every  possible 
subject.  Young  men  ought  to  have  the  courage 
to  be  sincere  upon  this  point.  There  are  still 
some  simple-minded  women,  but  only  very  few 
quite  exceptional  natures  among  men,  who  are 
brave  enough  to  be  ignorant  and  to  say  openly 
"  I  don't  know "  when  the  conversation  gets 
beyond  their  range.  People  should  consider 
that  it  is  beneath  them  to  repeat  parrot-wise, 
and  ought  to  confess  their  ignorance  honestly 
when  the  talk  concerns  something  which  they 
have  no  knowledge  of.  The  courage  which  will 
confess  ignorance  is  a  proof  of  breeding. 

Nowadays,  however,  a  man's  mind  is  expected 
to  be  a  mass  of  memoranda,  which  are  labelled 
as  a  general  education.  Education  in  its  real 
true  sense  is  the  very  opposite,  for  it  is  the  building 
up  of  the  independent  personality,  one  of  the 
noblest  and  most  difficult  moral  duties  of  man- 
kind. 

An  ever  -  increasing  mediocrity  has  resulted 
from  the  whole  trend  of  our  time  towards  the 
formation  of  huge  parties  and  the  growing  power 
of  journalism.  The  Middle  Ages  were  aristo- 
cratic in  the  good  sense  as  well  as  the  bad, 
the  present  day  is  mediocre  in  good  and  bad 
alike. 

Modern  democracy  has  given  the  middle  classes 
an  influence  which  is  often  carried  too  far,  and 
they  unite  a  natural  dislike  of  extremes  with  their 

VOL.  i  N 


178     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

many  social  good  qualities.  They  distrust  real 
genius,  the  attributes  of  high  birth  and  out- 
standing talent  are  distasteful  to  them,  and 
consequently  conventionality  has  always  been 
the  characteristic  of  their  ascendancy.  It  is 
typified  by  such  follies  as  Volapuk  or  "  Zohnen- 
uhr."  What  a  substitute  for  our  living  language 
which  God  gave  us,  and  our  human  instinct 
wrought  out  !  We  feel  sometimes  that  the  nine- 
teenth century  has  seen  a  great  enlargement 
of  the  limits  of  human  folly. 

There  is  one  fundamental  right,  which  no 
one  now  contests,  which  goes  hand  in  hand  with 
freedom  of  speech  through  the  Press.  It  is  that 
of  a  free  religious  development,  so  far  as  it  con- 
cerns the  individual  in  his  family  life.  The  right 
to  practise  his  private  devotions  follows  upon  the 
admission  of  his  freedom  of  conscience,  and  for 
him  it  is  sufficient,  but  we  shall  see  how  truly 
Schleiermacher  spoke  when  he  said  that  religion 
hates  isolation.  The  demand  for  the  recognition 
of  great  religious  communities  is  the  necessary 
consequence  of  freedom  of  conscience. 

All  these  individual  rights  of  which  we  have 
hitherto  spoken  are  of  small  value,  even  if  guar- 
anteed by  the  State,  unless  they  are  secured  by 
a  high  measure  of  tolerance  in  the  people.  We 
Germans  may  safely  say  that  we  are  in  this  respect 
the  freest  nation  in  the  world.  With  us  every 
man  may  bestride  his  own  hobby-horse.  We 
have  absolutely  no  national  prejudices  which 
may  not  be  assaulted.  The  Fatherland  itself  is 
not  held  sacred  in  conversation.  Upon  the  whole 
this  is  a  sign  of  the  inward  liberty  which  we  have 


SECRET  SOCIETIES  179 

attained  through  the  long  truce  of  the  many 
rival  persuasions  in  our  midst. 

In  the  Anglo-Saxon  countries  it  is  very  dif- 
ferent. There  are  in  England  certain  national 
ideas  of  decorum  which  must  not  be  transgressed. 
The  elastic  epithet  "  shocking "  wields  great 
power  there.  Other  nations  have  political  tradi- 
tions which  may  not  be  disputed.  It  would  not 
be  well  received  in  Switzerland  if  anybody  were 
ill-advised  enough  to  express  his  real  opinion 
about  the  mythical  history  of  William  Tell  and 
other  heroes  of  the  past. 

We  perceive  that  there  is  less  and  less  social 
tolerance  in  a  free  State  where  there  is  great 
political  activity  in  the  mass  of  the  population, 
and  that  with  the  increase  of  real  political  liberty, 
forbearance  towards  the  individual  ego  is  bound 
to  dwindle.  There  was  an  infinitely  greater 
originality  of  mind  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
under  an  Absolutist  form  of  government  than 
there  is  to-day.  Then  the  cultivated  men  in 
Germany  lived  so  secluded  that  they  were  able 
to  guard  their  own  personality  jealously,  and 
develop  it  in  their  own  fashion,  bizarre  as  it  often 
was.  Our  whole  existence,  on  the  other  hand, 
is  designed  to  make  men  like  a  flock  of  sheep, 
and  countless  habits  and  customs  are  now 
common  to  all.  The  irresistible  power  of  fashion 
is  example  enough.  Because  it  is  considered 
respectable  that  every  one  should  look  as  like 
his  neighbour  as  possible,  we  behold  the  miracle 
of  millions  clothing  themselves  in  garments  which 
they  feel  are  ridiculous. 

Liberty   for   development   of  the   personality 


180     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

carries  with  it  another  right,  almost  wider  in 
its  scope  —  that  of  freedom  to  form  associations 
and  assemblages  for  political,  social,  or  religious 
objects.  It  is  clear  that  the  sphere  of  the  in- 
dividual is  here  soon  left  behind,  and  equally 
obvious  that  this  privilege  is  in  much  greater 
danger  of  being  abused  than  mere  liberty  for 
opinions.  Stricter  limits  are  therefore  set  upon 
it.  Meetings  may  begin  for  a  legitimate  purpose, 
and  end  in  an  extremely  dangerous  Club  dominion 
if  they  are  allowed  to  go  on  permanently,  and 
at  last  Parliament  becomes  the  servant  of  the 
Club,  as  the  history  of  the  Jacobins  shows.  The 
State  must  therefore  regulate  associations  and 
assemblies  even  more  carefully  than  it  must 
control  the  Press.  Hence  comes  the  prohibition 
of  great  open-air  meetings,  or  at  least  the  order 
that  intimation  of  them  must  be  given  before- 
hand to  the  police.  More  is  involved  than  the 
personal  rights  of  the  individual,  for  it  is  a  ques- 
tion of  a  power  arising  which  may  easily  become 
a  menace  to  constituted  authority. 

It  is  an  important  principle  that  secret 
societies  must  not  be  tolerated  within  a  State. 
They  only  arise  where  freedom  is  absent,  or  they 
degenerate,  like  the  Nihilists,  into  anarchy.  There 
is  no  need  for  secrecy  when  every  chimera  may 
be  safely  followed  as  openly  as  it  is  with  us.  The 
State  makes  an  exception  in  favour  of  secret 
societies  which  it  knows  to  be  harmless.  In 
Protestant  countries  the  Freemasons  have  per- 
fectly innocent  social  objects  ;  in  Catholic  States 
it  is  different ;  in  Belgium,  for  instance,  they  wage 
a  continual  warfare  with  the  Confessional.  The 


EQUALITY  181 

German  people  have  fortunately  little  talent  for 
secret  societies  and  conspiracies,  but  they  have 
always  flourished  in  the  Latin  countries,  especi- 
ally in  those  which  have  long  been  politically 
oppressed. 

Furthermore,  no  society  can  be  tolerated 
which  demands  unconditional  obedience  to  an 
authority  other  than  the  State.  The  State  is 
sovereign,  and  therefore  it  may  not  concede  to 
its  members  the  right  of  subjecting  themselves 
to  any  other  power.  This  is  the  reason  why 
the  Society  of  Jesus  is  incompatible  with  the 
safety  of  a  modern  State.  The  oath  of  blind 
obedience  to  foreign  superiors  involves  the  con- 
tinual secret  interference  of  alien  influences.  It 
would  only  be  safe  to  tolerate  the  Jesuits  where 
they  can  be  constantly  watched,  and  rapidly 
expelled  in  times  of  danger,  as  was  done  under 
Frederick  the  Great,  who  could  have  banished 
them  at  any  moment,  with  a  promptitude  which 
no  Constitutional  monarch  could  hope  to  com- 
pass. 

In  conformity  with  the  French  pattern, 
equality  and  fraternity  are  added  to  the  right  of 
freedom  considered  common  to  all  mankind. 
Let  us  first  analyse  the  idea  of  fraternity.  We 
see  that  the  law  of  charity  cannot  be  binding  for 
the  State.  Charity  cannot  be  made  to  order, 
but  must  spring  spontaneously  from  the  heart. 
Neglect  of  this  truth  led  at  the  time  of  the 
French  Revolution  to  the  self  -  contradictory 
motto,  "  La  Fraternite  ou  la  Mort "  !  There  is  no 
cajoling  fraternity  ;  it  must  come  uncalled  with 
experience  of  life,  and  consequently  it  must 


182      GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

never  be  cited  as  a  fundamental  right,  since  no 
legal  principle  can  be  deduced  from  it. 

Equality  too,  taken  by  itself,  is  clearly  mean- 
ingless, for  it  may  as  well  involve  equal  slavery 
as  equal  freedom.  There  is  no  greater  bondage 
than  the  dead  level  of  monastic  life,  where  the 
idea  is  carried  out  to  the  uttermost  in  the  sense 
of  equal  slavery.  History  shows  us  how  the 
nations  which  prize  equality  above  all  else  are 
precisely  those  who  fall  into  a  condition  of  uni- 
versal slavery,  as  the  French  illustrated  when 
they  wanted  to  pull  down  Strasburg  Cathedral 
because  it  towered  above  the  other  houses. 

So  the  end  of  it  all  is  a  frenzy  of  equality. 

Equality  can  obviously  only  be  morally  postu- 
lated for  those  most  universal  and  highest 
blessings  which  it  is  man's  peculiar  dignity  to 
aspire  to.  For  instance,  we  all  have  like  claims 
to  those  aspects  of  liberty  already  considered — 
personal  freedom  and  legal  personality  ;  we  have 
the  right  to  express  and  give  effect  to  our  reasoned 
opinions,  religious  convictions,  etc.  The  equality 
of  all  subjects  before  the  judge  is  an  absolute 
constitutional  necessity.  This  reasonable  de- 
mand has  led,  as  we  have  already  seen,  by  a 
confusion  of  thought,  to  the  idea  of  the  equality 
of  all  in  the  eye  of  the  law. 

The  State  can  only  recognize  the  equality  of 
all  men  in  as  far  as  it  corresponds  with  the  actual 
nature  of  things.  The  State,  as  we  know,  is  the 
outward  form  which  a  nation  has  moulded  for 
itself  in  the  course  of  history.  It  will  therefore 
be  healthiest  if  it  respects,  and  legally  recognizes, 
existing  inequalities  of  birth,  wealth,  education, 


POLITICAL  EQUALITY  183 

etc.  If,  on  the  contrary,  it  tries  to  ignore  natural 
differences,  they  will  avenge  themselves  in  the 
feebleness  of  the  Constitution,  even  as  democracies 
have  ever  run  a  more  spasmodic  course  than 
the  aristocracies  or  monarchies  which  take  these 
differences  into  account.  The  State  cannot 
guarantee  an  equal  wealth,  only  an  equal  right 
to  inheritance.  It  would  be  a  mad  undertaking 
to  attempt  to  establish  an  equality  of  riches, 
which  depend  first  and  foremost  upon  the  various 
talents  and  capabilities  of  the  individual.  It 
would  wreak  havoc  with  all  the  beauty,  the 
greatness,  the  variety  of  our  civilization  ;  we 
cannot  imagine  the  empty  monotony  of  life  in 
these  conditions.  Moreover,  there  is  a  further 
obstacle  to  the  equality  of  possessions.  By  far 
the  greatest  part  of  what  we  have  has  been 
earned,  not  by  the  present  generation,  but  by 
the  industry  of  those  who  went  before.  Justice 
demands  that  they,  who  wrought  for  it,  should 
decide  upon  the  division  and  possession  of  their 
property.  The  law  of  inheritance  is  therefore  a 
perfectly  natural  necessity. 

Furthermore,  there  is  no  State  where  political 
rights  are  meted  out  quite  equally.  It  is  both 
untrue  and  revolutionary  to  say  that  every 
human  being  has  a  natural  right  to  share  in  the 
construction  of  the  Government.  Every  State 
places  certain  limits  upon  the  Suffrage ;  it  ex- 
cludes women,  minors,  criminals,  etc.  It  insists 
on  definite  qualifications  for  the  filling  of  certain 
high  offices,  and  it  is  beside  the  point  whether 
the  standard  it  fixes  is  one  of  wealth  or  birth  or 
knowledge.  It  depends  upon  the  constitution 


of  the  State  which  quality  will  be  most  con- 
sidered, but  equality  is  nowhere  to  be  found. 
In  the  aristocratic  England  of  times  gone  by  it 
was  believed  that  a  young  man  of  good  family 
would  possess  the  knowledge  which  is  needful 
for  a  ruler  of  men,  and  these  young  gentlemen, 
who  had  passed  no  examination,  ruled  after 
such  a  fashion  that  the  greatness  and  the  power 
of  their  country  increased  beyond  calculation. 
In  Germany,  on  the  other  hand,  we  demand  a 
fixed  standard  of  knowledge,  to  be  measured 
by  examination,  and  our  plan  also  has  had  good 
results.  Our  official  system  is  admirable,  and 
more  freely  accessible  to  talent  than  is  the  case 
in  any  other  country.  But  it  is  easy  to  see 
that  there  is  no  question  of  legal  equality  in  it. 
Material  qualifications  are  usually  bound  up 
with  the  intellectual  tests,  and  only  a  small 
minority  of  the  great  mass  of  the  population  will 
ever  swell  the  ranks  of  the  officials,  who  will 
always  be  recruited  from  the  well-to-do  classes, 
who  can  afford  to  give  their  children  a  wider 
education.  The  barrier  is,  fortunately,  not  in- 
superable. Talent  can  break  it  down,  and  it  is 
impossible  to  give  it  too  many  opportunities  to 
force  its  way  through. 

We  Germans  are,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  a  more 
democratic  nation  than  the  English  ever  were, 
and  our  official  system  is  framed  upon  those 
lines.  But  this  gives  us  no  reason  for  saying 
that  England  is  wrong  when  she  attaches  so 
much  importance  to  birth.  If  we  have  ourselves 
a  number  of  families  whose  right  to  sit  in  the 
House  of  Lords  is  hereditary,  it  is  not  because 


THE  RIGHT  OF  RESISTANCE        185 

we  desired  to  show  especial  favour  to  them,  but 
rather  because  the  State  felt  that  these  ancient 
houses  were  so  identified  with  its  own  well-being 
that  they  must  not  be  ignored  by  the  legislature. 

The  examination  superstition  is  matched 
everywhere  to-day  by  the  vote  superstition. 
But  what  does  the  vote  do  beyond  raising  to 
power  the  party  which  has  for  the  moment  the 
most  adherents,  although  it  is  so  frequently  the 
most  foolish  and  the  worst  ?  There  is  no  gain- 
saying the  principle  that  the  pretension  to  a 
direct  share  in  Government  cannot  be  grounded 
in  human  nature  as  such,  for  it  is  both  the  right 
and  the  duty  of  every  State  to  lay  down  the 
conditions  under  which  such  participation  shall 
be  guaranteed.  It  is  upon  the  whole  an  ad- 
vantage when  constitutional  laws  consider  and 
emphasize  the  natural  inequality  among  men. 

Finally,  let  us  consider  the  so-called  right  of 
resistance,  which  has  been  held  up  as  the  security 
for  all  these  rights  of  freedom.  This  became  a 
burning  question  when  the  Christian  world  awoke 
to  the  sovereignty  of  the  individual  conscience. 
It  could  hardly  come  into  conflict  with  the  law 
in  the  States  of  antiquity,  because  the  whole  life 
of  the  people  was  then  contained  by  the  State, 
which  could  therefore  do  no  wrong.  The  decision 
of  the  sovereign  people  was  in  itself  lawful,  and 
the  individual  must  accommodate  himself  to  it, 
as  a  part  of  the  whole.  Moreover,  since  the 
ancient  world  had  only  national  religions,  there 
was  no  contrast  between  Church  and  State,  and 
the  difficulty  did  not  arise  until  the  Christian  era. 
But  in  how  terrible  a  shape  did  it  present  itself 


186     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

to  the  first  Christians !  They  had  to  sunder 
themselves  from  a  Pagan  State,  which  to  them 
was  an  accursed  thing.  Therefore  we  can  find 
no  positive  feeling  of  citizenship  among  them,  for 
the  Christians  of  those  days  could  only  yield  a 
painful  and  reluctant  obedience  to  the  State. 
This  is  the  cause  of  the  peculiar  clandestine 
position  which  Celsus  and  other  noble  Romans 
reproached  them  so  severely  for  adopting.  In 
the  last  resort  they  put  themselves  on  the 
defensive,  and  found  their  fame  in  martyrdom. 
Thus  the  history  of  the  earliest  Christianity  is 
the  record  of  a  continual  resistance  to  authority. 
Politically,  the  first  Christians  were  no  other 
than  rebels.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  impulse 
of  humility  and  submission  is  so  much  in  the 
spirit  of  the  New  Testament  that  doubts  very 
soon  arose  as  to  how  far  this  resistance  should 
be  carried ;  and  as  the  Roman  Empire  became 
Christianized  the  principle  of  sorrowful  obedience 
was  established  more  and  more.  It  was  but 
little  disputed  during  the  Middle  Ages,  but  the 
century  of  the  Reformation  is  the  classic  era 
in  which  every  man  had  to  settle  the  question 
of  resistance  with  his  own  conscience.  Then  we 
see  on  every  hand  how  Catholics  and  Protestants 
summoned  their  foreign  co-religionists  to  their 
aid  against  the  enemies  of  their  faith  among 
their  own  countrymen.  Here  was  the  natural 
ground  on  which  the  doctrine  of  the  right  of 
resistance  took  root  and  flourished.  Zwingli,  a 
decided  Republican,  summarily  pronounced  that 
authority  should  be  accursed  of  God  when  it 
forsook  the  way  of  Christ.  Calvin  said  :hat  the 


ENGLISH  CONSTITUTION  187 

subject  was  relieved  from  his  allegiance  to  the 
earthly  power  when  it  contradicted  the  Word 
of  God.  Luther,  however,  only  reached  this 
opinion  very  slowly,  and  after  many  inward 
struggles.  He  was  near  his  life's  end  before  he 
decided  that  there  is  no  distinction  between 
the  Emperor  and  the  common  murderer,  if  the 
Emperor  employs  public  or  notorie  unjust 
power  outside  his  office ;  for  public  violentia 
abrogates  all  obligations  between  subjects  and 
rulers,  jure  naturae.  The  German  Lutherans, 
who  were  not  capable  politicians,  applied  this 
axiom  very  unskilfully,  and  after  a  time  aban- 
doned it  again,  so  that  Lutheranism  got  the 
reputation  of  being  in  dependant  subjection  to 
the  territorial  suzerains. 

Theoretic  disputants  also  engage  in  these  con- 
troversies. There  are  the  so-called  "  Monarcho- 
machen  "  who  defend  the  subjects'  right  of  resist- 
ance from  the  Old  Testament  books.  Every 
really  believing  nation,  they  say,  makes  a  contract 
with  the  Lord,  and  in  virtue  thereof  the  secular 
power  undertakes  to  maintain  the  authority  of 
the  Word  of  God.  So  long  as  they  keep  their 
pledge,  the  people  obey  them,  but  are  freed  if  it 
is  broken.  The  Jesuits  preach  the  same  doctrine 
for  different  reasons.  For  them  the  Church  is 
the  only  State  directly  sanctioned  by  God. 
Consequently  no  secular  State  has  the  right  to 
exist  unless  it  serves  and  obeys  the  Church. 
Otherwise  it  may  be  disregarded,  and  even 
regicide  is  permitted.  Disciples  of  the  Jesuits 
carried  out  the  murder  of  Henry  III.  and  IV.  of 
France. 


188     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

During  these  very  troubles  the  Huguenot 
Languet  brought  out  his  book  Vindiciae  contra 
tyrannos.  He  summed  up  his  wisdom  in  the 
sentence,  "  We  will  allow  the  King  to  govern  us 
if  he  will  allow  the  law  to  govern  him."  Here 
already  we  find  the  implication  of  a  mutually 
binding  contract,  and  the  theory  soon  became 
all-pervading,  until  in  the  seventeenth  and  eigh- 
teenth centuries  nearly  every  political  thinker 
was  imbued  with  the  idea  that  the  Government 
and  the  nation  had  concluded  a  treaty,  not  to 
be  held  binding  if  broken  by  either  party.  This 
conception  prevailed  to  such  an  extent  that  it 
became  the  foundation  of  the  whole  English 
constitutional  law.  It  is  characteristic  of  the 
shallowness  of  modern  Liberalism  to  fail  to  see 
how  the  much-admired  English  constitution  rests 
upon  the  totally  perverted  doctrine  of  contract. 
This  must  be  insisted  upon,  although  it  is  an 
unpalatable  truth  to  most  moderate  Constitu- 
tionalists. The  Guelphs  have  nothing  else  to 
thank  for  the  throne  of  England.  The  King 
made  himself  a  party  to  a  treaty  with  his  people  ; 
he  broke  his  part  of  the  bargain,  and  was  accord- 
ingly driven  into  exile.  There  is  the  ruling 
principle,  which  even  Frederick  the  Great  re- 
cognized when  he  said,  "  The  Prince  has  promised 
to  guard  his  people's  rights.  If  one  side  breaks 
faith  the  other  is  absolved  from  keeping  it." 
As  a  matter  of  practice,  however,  the  champion 
of  this  doctrine  would  have  had  short  shrift 
with  old  Fritz  ! 

There  was  indeed  a  vast  difference  between 
theory  and  practice  in  the  eighteenth  century. 


THE   RIGHT  OF  RESISTANCE       189 

Theoretically  this  teaching  of  resistance  was' 
hardly  disputed.  It  is  to  old  Kant's  eternal 
honour  that  he  discovered  its  latent  contra- 
diction, although  his  political  beliefs  were  in  other 
respects  very  radical  and  in  sympathy  with 
those  of  Rousseau.  In  his  Natural  Law  he  deals 
with  the  doctrine  of  resistance  in  a  manner 
which  redounds  greatly  to  his  credit.  It  is  a 
remarkable  thing  that  great  men  alone  have  the 
courage  to  be  inconsistent.  Every  one  reaches 
a  point  in  their  intellectual  development  when 
they  must  gainsay  themselves  and  retract  some 
earlier  beliefs  and  assertions.  It  requires  a  man 
of  mark  to  do  this  freely  and  fairly,  the  mediocre 
mind  fights  shy  of  it.  Kant  remarked  quite 
justly  that  the  doctrine  of  resistance  rights 
contained  a  contradiction.  The  rights,  he 
pointed  out,  have  to  be  conferred  upon  the 
people  by  the  sanction  of  a  public  law ;  that  is 
to  say  that  the  most  authoritative  legislation 
contained  within  itself  a  denial  of  its  own  supre- 
macy. Kant  was  on  the  right  track,  but  he 
was  himself  too  much  a  child  of  the  eighteenth 
century  to  be  able  to  find  the  way  out  of  the 
dilemma. 

The  ridiculous  idea  of  the  State  subordinate 
to  Personal  Rights,  of  which  it  is  the  creator, 
only  disappeared  in  Germany  at  the  rise  of  the 
historical  school  of  thinkers.  It  was  realized 
that  a  treaty  derives  its  binding  force  firstly 
from  the  State,  and  at  any  rate  nobody  would 
dare  now  to  ground  a  right  of  resistance  upon 
the  old  doctrine  of  a  mutual  contract,  for  the 
really  scientific  minds  perceived  its  folly.  Here 


190  GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

Savigny  and  Niebuhr  stand  clearly  for  the 
liberal  political  thought,  while  Welcker  and  his 
companions  are  the  reactionaries. 

We  must  therefore  banish  all  thought  of  any 
absolute  right  of  resistance.  No  modern  Con- 
stitution, not  even  Roumania's  or  Norway's,  have 
assumed  such  a  thing.  But  since  some  limit 
must  be  placed  upon  the  caprice  of  authority, 
the  doctrine  of  so-called  constitutional  obedience 
arose,  which  has  attained  so  astounding  a 
domination  among  average  Liberals.  It  sets  forth 
that  if  authority  gives  an  unlawful  command,  it 
is  to  be  regarded  as  a  capricious  action,  and  may 
be  disobeyed  by  every  subject.  Most  people 
adopt  this  as  an  axiom  as  light-heartedly  as  I 
myself  in  my  younger  days.  We  were  all 
Radicals  at  the  time  of  the  German  Confedera- 
tion, and  in  those  days  I  believed  that  resistance 
to  the  illegal  ordinances  of  authority  stood 
self -acquitted  from  the  first.  Then  one  day  I 
went  to  my  fatherly  old  friend,  Professor  Albrecht 
of  Leipsic,  the  celebrated  teacher  of  jurisprudence, 
who  had  been  one  of  the  Gottingen  Seven  and 
had  given  up  his  income  and  made  immense 
sacrifices,  and  when  I  expounded  to  him  these 
views  of  mine,  he  answered,  "  Ah,  my  dear 
young  friend,  think  it  over  again,  for  it  is  nothing 
more  nor  less  than  a  petitio  principii."  And 
yet  he  had  himself  made  practical  trial  of  it  all. 
I  could  not  hide  from  myself  that  his  theoretic 
condemnation  was  absolutely  sound,  for  although 
it  is  correct  to  premise  that  authority  is  acting 
capriciously  when  it  issues  a  command  in  defiance 
of  law,  it  is  clearly  false  to  conclude  that  such 


THE  RIGHT  OF  RESISTANCE        191 

command  may  be  lawfully  withstood  by  every 
one. 

Who,  then,  is  to  decide  whether  a  decree  is  in 
accordance  with  the  Constitution  or  not  ?  The 
outcome  of  this  doctrine,  both  in  theory  and 
practice,  would  be  to  make  the  individual  con- 
science sovereign  over  the  public  authority. 
Then  indeed  would  the  pyramid  of  the  State  be 
set  upon  its  apex,  if  the  command  were  thus 
shifted  from  the  ruler  to  the  ruled. 

We  have  shown,  then,  that  this  teaching  is 
quite  worthless,  and  it  has  been  recognized  as 
such  by  all  practical  legislation  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  No  one  has  defended  the  absolute 
right  of  resistance  since  the  fatal  experiment 
made  with  it  in  France.  The  Convention  laid 
down  this  clause  in  its  Constitution  :  "  If  the 
Government  infringes  the  Rights  of  the  nation, 
rebellion  is  the  most  sacred  privilege  and  the 
most  indispensable  duty  of  all  and  every  section 
of  the  people."  Every  man  of  the  thirty  million 
of  Frenchmen  thus  became  one  of  the  tribunal 
which  was  to  decide  whether  the  constituted 
authority  had  injured  the  nation's  rights.  How- 
ever, this  constitution  had  not  been  in  force  for 
more  than  three  weeks  before  civil  war  broke 
out,  a  war  of  all  against  all. 

In  this  doctrine  of  the  right  of  resistance  we 
have  a  clear  instance  of  the  confusion  which  is 
introduced  into  the  elements  of  politics  by  the 
use  of  the  same  word  in  German  to  mean  both 
44  Rights  "  and  4'  Law."  * 

The  idea  of  a  positive  right  of  resistance  arose 

1  Translator's  note  :  "  Recht." 


192     GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

in  the  mind  of  the  shallow  thinker,  because 
every  man  who  believed  in  the  moral  justification 
of  his  disobedience  to  a  decree  of  the  State 
spoke  of  it  as  a  lawful  resistance.  Such  a  right 
is  as  a  matter  of  fact  not  thinkable  at  all.  There 
can  be  no  law  to  set  aside  the  law  of  the  land, 
nor  can  there  ever  be  a  right  to  perpetrate  a 
wrong.  Neither  is  there  a  law  of  resistance  to 
action  taken  by  authority  which  runs  counter 
to  law.  This  is  the  reason  wh^  the  German 
Penal  Code  makes  it  a  punishable  offence  to 
withstand  an  official  who  is  carrying  out  in  legal 
fashion  the  commands  of  constituted  authority, 
irrespective  of  the  legality  of  the  command 
itself.  The  individual  against  whom  the  illegal 
order  was  directed  can  only  find  redress  by 
lodging  a  complaint  against  the  action  of 
authority  ;  upon  his  plea  the  State  itself  will 
then  examine  into  the  circumstances. 

There  is  no  taint  of  servility  in  all  this,  for  it 
is  obvious  that  denial  of  the  right  of  resistance 
for  the  individual  conscience  does  not  carry  with 
it  permission  for  the  Government  to  run  com- 
pletely counter  to  the  moral  assent  of  the  citizens. 
Certain  it  is  that  we  cannot  uphold  the  American 
Declaration  of  the  inborn  rights  of  all  mankind, 
but  equally  certainly  it  contains  the  germ  of 
truth.  There  is  an  exaggeration  in  that  sentence 
of  the  United  States  Declaration  of  Independence 
which  runs  "  the  just  powers  of  Governments 
are  founded  upon  the  consent  of  the  governed," 
but  Government  is  always  and  everywhere 
unstable  unless  it  rules  for  the  benefit  of  the 
people  and  can  rely  upon  their  moral  support. 


THE  OATH  193 

"  Salus  civium  suprema  lex  "  holds  good  without 
exception  for  every  State.  Germany  has  grown 
great  upon  this  principle,  and  to  abandon  it 
would  mean  anarchy  and  ruin.  Cromwell,  even 
in  his  day,  was  able  to  say  that  the  world  was 
beginning  to  deride  the  delusion  that  the  people 
belong  to  the  King.  If  a  Government  really 
and  fundamentally  transgresses  against  the  com- 
mon weal,  a  contradiction  may  arise,  so  great 
that  the  Constitution  will  at  last  be  shattered. 
This  will  be  recognized  by  the  most  staunch 
Conservative  ;  there  are  great  moral  treasures 
belonging  to  man  which  stand  so  high  that  the 
Constitution  of  States  is  a  little  thing  in  com- 
parison ;  citizens  may  be  driven,  especially  for 
the  sake  of  their  faith,  to  overturn  existing 
authority  and  to  dare  a  revolution.  But  this 
can  never  be  a  law.  The  Revolt  of  the  Nether- 
lands, and  many  others,  can  be  historically 
justified,  but  never  upon  grounds  of  law. 

There  is  no  better  way  of  demonstrating  this 
truth  than  by  drawing  a  comparison  between  the 
relationship  of  r,uler  and  subject,  and  another 
relationship  which  ought  to  be  equally  indis- 
soluble— namely,  marriage. 

The  marriage  tie  must  sometimes  be  broken, 
but  if  it  were  set  forth  in  the  marriage  contract 
that  this  should  happen  in  such  and  such  cases, 
it  would  be  marriage  no  more,  but  simply  con- 
cubinage. Although  human  sin  and  frailty  may 
sometimes  dissolve  it  of  necessity,  it  is  not  to 
be  laid  down  definitely  in  the  contract.  It  is 
equally  impossible  to  define  beforehand  what 
are  the  circumstances  in  which  obedience  to  the 

VOL.  i  o 


194  GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED 

State  may  be  set  aside.  While  we  recognize 
what  noble  and  lofty  impulses  have  sometimes 
driven  nations  to  overthrow  their  own  Constitu- 
tions, we  must  never  allow  ourselves  to  look 
upon  their  acts  as  the  exercise  of  Rights. 

Herein  lies  the  tremendous  importance  of  the 
Oath.  The  political  oath  is  necessary  to  protect 
the  State  from  continual  revolts  and  risings. 
Although  it  creates  no  new  obligations  it  sharpens 
the  consciousness  of  those  already  existing.  It 
is  the  atheists  who  are  responsible  for  the  folly 
of  the  Radical  cry  for  the  abolition  of  the  oath, 
but  it  is  an  insolence  when  a  small  minority 
demand  that  the  whole  State  should  act  according 
to  their  wishes.  The  experience  of  a  thousand 
years  has  taught  the  indispensability  of  the 
oath  ;  for  one  thing,  it  is  essential  for  the  Army. 
The  French,  as  we  know,  have  broken  the  oath 
of  allegiance  pretty  often  in  the  last  hundred 
years ;  and  it  is  significant  how,  after  each 
occasion,  the  proposal  was  made  to  do  away 
with  the  political  oath  in  the  new  Constitution. 
They  realised  the  guilt  of  perjury  and  wished  to 
spare  themselves  so  uncomfortable  a  feeling  for 
the  future.  This  is  example  enough  to  prove  that 
the  oath  remains  a  real  power  in  the  State. 

The  maintenance  of  its  sanctity  in  truth  and 
honesty  is  always  a  sure  sign  of  the  high  moral 
worth  of  a  nation.  Soon  after  the  War  of 
Liberation  Schleiermacher  made  a  very  pertinent 
remark  about  the  old  German  Confederation. 
11  What  makes  this  senseless  situation  endure  at 
all  ?  "  he  asked;  "nothing  but  the  integrity  of 
the  German  people."  The  firm  grip  upon  duty, 


GOVERNMENT  AND  GOVERNED     195 

morals,  and  customs,  even  to  the  point  of  pre- 
judice and  narrow-mindedness,  is  at  the  root 
of  German  character.  This  strong  feeling  for 
law  may  hinder  a  nation's  development  under 
certain  circumstances,  but  the  moral  advantage 
to  be  drawn  from  such  tremendous  integrity  is 
far  greater  than  any  political  drawback  it  con- 
tains. In  the  passionate  excitement  of  the 
year  1866  every  one  of  us  who  was  Prussian  in 
sympathy  asked  inwardly  why  the  South  German 
troops  did  not  come  over  to  the  black  and  white 
Standard.  Later  on,  in  cold  blood  we  ourselves 
had  to  admit  that  their  fidelity  to  their  military 
oath  was  a  sign  of  the  sterling  quality  of  these 
soldiers  ;  a  firm  assurance  that  they  would  in 
time  to  come  fight  for  the  German  cause  with 
a  far  more  joyous  spirit.  And  how  did  not  they 
fight,  in  the  bloody  days  of  1870  and  1871,  these 
brave  Bavarians  and  Wurtemburgers,  Hessians 
and  Saxons,  whom  we  used  to  gird  at !  Have 
we  any  cause  to  envy  the  Italians  because  at  last 
everybody  came  over  to  Garibaldi  ? 

Steadfast  loyalty,  even  though  it  may  be 
blind,  and  sometimes  politically  mischievous, 
must  always  remain  a  proof  of  the  healthy 
condition  of  a  State  and  a  nation. 


SECOND  BOOK 

THE   SOCIAL  FOUNDATIONS  OF 
THE   STATE 


197 


VI 
LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

ARISTOTLE  said  long  ago  that  the  State  re- 
quires a  particular  kind  of  material,  capable 
of  being  soundly  and  reasonably  organized,  and 
he  defined  this  natural  material  as  land  and 
people.  This  conception,  simple  and  empirical 
after  the  fashion  of  antiquity,  has  prevailed 
in  the  end  over  that  doctrine  of  Natural  Law 
which  finds  the  foundation  for  the  State  among 
the  clouds  of  fancy.  We  have  returned  to 
Aristotle  since  the  time  of  Herder.  It  is  quite 
clear  that  the  State  is  founded  upon  the  posses- 
sion of  land.  A  fixed  territory  is  a  primary 
condition  for  the  existence  of  a  healthy  State, 
and  exceptions  make  no  difference  to  this  rule. 
It  is  true  that  we  may  still  grant  the  title  of 
State  to  the  Visigoths  in  their  wanderings  under 
Alaric,  or  to  the  Athenians  fleeing  upon  their 
ships,  but  these  were  immature  circumstances 
or  transitory  conditions.  Land  and  people  must 
go  together,  because  the  self-sufficingness  which 
is  the  essence  of  the  State  is  unthinkable  apart 
from  the  possession  of  definite  territory. 

The  relation  in  which  the  State  stands  to  the 
land  is  one  of  political  dominion,  and  the  sub- 

199 


200  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

jection  of  the  territory  to  the  lawful  commands 
of  authority  :  potestas  but  not  proprietas.  Pro- 
prietas,  however,  may  be  added,  for  in  many 
theocracies  the  State  is  also  the  holder  of  the 
land.  Among  the  Jews  a  fresh  partition  of  the 
soil  was  decreed  for  each  year  of  jubilee,  and  the 
underlying  legal  idea  was  to  show  that  Jehovah 
was  the  real  possessor  of  the  Promised  Land. 
This  patrimonial  conception  of  the  claim  of  the 
State  upon  the  soil  of  the  country  is  common 
to  all  the  theocracies  of  the  East.  In  the  same 
way  the  State  was  regarded  in  feudal  countries 
as  possessor  of  the  land  in  virtue  of  its  feudal 
overlordship.  Later  still,  the  conquered  pro- 
vinces in  Switzerland  were  governed  as  Prefec- 
tures, that  is  to  say,  absolutely  as  the  private 
property  of  particular  cantons.  Constitutions 
framed  upon  this  principle  have  disappeared  in  the 
course  of  time,  because  the  principle  is  unworthy 
and  inconsistent  with  liberty.  These  privately 
owned  possessions  have  been  converted  into  pro- 
vinces and  cantons  endowed  with  equal  rights. 

There  were  some  instances  in  the  Middle  Ages 
when  this  more  slavish  conception  contributed 
to  strengthen  the  power  of  the  State.  William 
the  Conqueror  obtained  very  direct  political 
control  through  becoming  the  actual  possessor 
of  the  conquered  island.  But  in  nearly  every 
case  the  confusion  between  the  rights  of  the 
State  and  the  individual  in  the  feudal  system 
is  the  very  cause  of  lack  of  precision  in  the 
understanding  of  wrhat  the  State  actually  is. 
Above  all,  the  idea  of  the  inalienability  of  its 
dominions  can  only  be  properly  apprehended  in 


INALIENABLE  TERRITORY          201 

fully  matured  political  conditions.  The  mis- 
understandings which  prevailed  among  our  petty 
Princes  are  proofs  in  themselves  of  how  little 
this  idea  had  taken  root.  The  Dukes  of  Nassau 
and  Siegen,  dwelling  in  Siegen  side  by  side, 
divided  from  each  other  by  violent  national 
hatred  and  religious  differences,  regarded  them- 
selves only  as  rival  landowners. 

Brandenburg,  in  1473,  was  the  first  of  the 
territories  to  lay  down  the  principle  of  indivisi- 
bility in  the  "  Dispositio  Achillea  "  of  Albrecht 
Achill.  Its  example  was  gradually  followed  by 
the  larger  among  its  neighbours,  by  Weimar 
only  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth,  and  Meiningen 
at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century.  In 
these  cases  it  was  pure  imitation,  as  these  little 
places  could  not  really  feel  that  they  were  States. 
We  only  understand  the  value  of  what  we  possess 
in  Prussia  when  we  examine  these  miserable 
conditions  in  Thuringia. 

Since  the  State  must,  humanly  speaking,  be 
regarded  as  eternal,  its  domain  must  be  enduring, 
and  not  alienable  like  an  ordinary  estate.  There- 
fore this  principle  is  incorporated  in  modern 
Constitutions,  although,  like  all  that  is  human, 
it  must  only  be  taken  relatively.  It  means  that 
surrender  of  territory  can  only  take  place  by 
formal  decision  of  the  supreme  Government, 
consequently  with  the  formal  consent  of  all 
legal  authority,  so  that  the  unconsidered  hawking 
of  provinces,  as  in  the  Middle  Ages,  is  put  a  stop 
to.  But  the  possibility  of  loss  of  territory  in 
the  event  of  an  unfortunate  Treaty  of  Peace  is 
not  hereby  excluded. 


202  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

Here  we  must  pause  to  consider  how  mar- 
vellously the  opinion  of  modern  nations  has 
altered  in  respect  to  the  legal  aspect  of  surrender 
of  land  and  people. 

In  primitive  barbaric  times  it  was  naturally 
the  rule  for  the  victor  either  to  slay,  drive  out, 
or  enslave  the  alien  inhabitants.  He  would 
seize  the  whole  of  their  private  property,  and 
was  thought  generous  if  he  did  no  more  than 
make  the  native  dwellers  his  slaves.  The  idea 
of  the  law  changed  when  economic  conditions 
had  become  firmly  established.  Then,  as  soon 
as  a  piece  of  land  had  been  given  over  in  due 
legal  form,  its  inhabitants  were  released  from 
their  former  allegiance,  and  became  lawful  sub- 
jects of  the  State  which  now  ruled  them.  Their 
actual  possessions  were  thus  spared,  and  it 
became  possible  for  material  existence  to  continue 
undisturbed  all  through  an  unfortunate  con- 
clusion of  peace.  Hugo  Grotius  advocated  this, 
and  appeared  in  the  guise  of  a  tender-hearted 
reformer. 

This  aspect  of  the  law  expressed  the  real 
desires  of  the  nations.  In  the  days  of  a  prepon- 
deratingly  economic  life,  men  clung  so  fast  to 
their  own  soil  that  they  even  found  it  bearable 
to  change  their  Fatherland.  But  even  as  we 
speak  opinions  on  this  matter  begin  to  alter. 
The  feeling  of  national  honour  has  become  so 
keen  and  sensitive  that  we  have  clearly  entered 
upon  a  new  stage  in  the  public  consciousness 
regarding  it.  The  idea  of  becoming  Frenchmen 
is  so  terrible  to  us  that  we  would  sooner  forfeit 
our  material  existence.  This  was  already  recog- 


ALSACE-LORRAINE  203 

nized  in  1871  by  the  giving  of  an  option  to  the 
individual  inhabitants  of  Alsace  and  Lorraine. 
This  very  instance  has  shown  us  the  danger  of 
granting  this  right,  and  how  true  it  is  that,  in 
political  life,  no  man  can  serve  two  masters. 
We  were  far  too  good-natured,  and  the  choice 
should  never  have  been  given. 

We  see,  then,  that  sentiments  change  on  this 
point,  but  it  remains  unalterably  true  that  the 
opinion  of  the  surrendered  province  itself  should 
not  be  asked  by  the  State  as  a  whole  when  it 
takes  the  decision.  If  the  dominions  of  a  State 
are  indivisible  in  law,  save  by  the  deliberate 
action  of  the  supreme  Government,  then  it 
follows  that  no  single  portion  of  the  realm 
may  raise  its  voice  against  that  decree.  No 
town  is  consulted  as  to  whether  it  shall  be  made 
into  a  fortress,  and  it  must  be  equally  acquiescent 
if,  by  legal  decision,  it  is  torn  away  from  its 
parent  State.  Terrible  and  hard  as  it  may  be 
for  those  who  suffer  by  it,  there  is  no  alternative. 
Suppose  that  we  had  taken  a  referendum  of 
the  people  in  Alsace-Lorraine  in  1871.  If  the 
Alsatians  had  declared  against  annexation  we 
could  not  have  agreed  to  their  refusal,  and  in 
saecula  saeculorum  we  should  have  had  to  go  on 
fighting.  That  is  where  the  modern  doctrine 
of  the  philanthropic  pacifist  prigs  would  have 
landed  us.  There  can  be  no  end  to  a  war  until 
the  hard  fact  is  faced  that  the  part  must  be 
obedient  to  the  whole. 

This  becomes  yet  plainer  when  we  consider 
that  such  popular  votes  are  in  their  very  nature 
shams.  Are  we  to  be  expected  to  believe  in 


204  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

the  sincerity  of  the  one  taken  in  Nice  and  Savoy 
when  it  is  well  known  what  a  cloud  of  emissaries 
from  Paris  were  there  to  influence  popular 
opinion  ?  Moreover,  Italy  had  already  given 
up  the  provinces,  and  there  was  no  more  to  be 
done.  The  inhabitants  of  Nice  and  Savoy  are 
prudent  Southerners  and  worldly-wise  ;  we  find 
it  most  sagacious  to  assure  our  position  from  the 
beginning. 

More  important  than  these  legal  considera- 
tions are  the  deeper  historical  problems  of  how 
the  geological  and  geographical  formation  of 
countries  influences  the  development  of  States. 
We  have  made  great  advances  in  this  knowledge 
since  the  days  of  Herder.  The  dependence  upon 
natural  conditions  has  long  been  recognized, 
it  is  indeed  already  exaggerated  by  the  material- 
istic tendency  of  our  time.  Karl  Ritter,  who  was 
properly  the  inventor  of  scientific  geography, 
was  secured  by  his  deep  piety  from  its  con- 
comitant materialistic  consequences.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Englishman  Buckle  wrote  a 
book,  bearing  lucus  a  non  lucendo  the  title  of 
History  of  Civilization,  which  is  regarded  by  all 
materialists  as  a  very  fount  of  wisdom.  In  it 
the  history  of  nations  is  traced  back  to  the 
configuration  of  the  country  and  to  the  form  of 
their  nourishment  by  a  schoolboy's  error,  which 
assumes  that  because  civilization  is  conditioned 
by  such  things  it  is  totally  dependent  upon  them. 

Here  once  more  we  approach  one  of  those 
deep  problems  of  historical  interaction  which 
are  the  beauty  and  fascination  of  history. 
Thucydides  makes  Pericles  say,  "  Man  does  not 


NATURE  AND  MAN  205 

belong  to  the  land  ;  the  land  belongs  to  man." 
The  thought  is  indeed  too  idealistic;  we  weak 
human  beings  are  not  mighty  enough  to  rise 
above  the  circumstances  of  Nature  which  sur- 
round our  lives,  but  we  do  possess,  in  great 
measure,  the  power  to  overcome  them.  When 
you  come  to  read  Dahlmann's  Danish  History, 
one  of  the  finest  historical  books  ever  written 
in  the  German  language,  you  will  not  be  able  to 
withhold  your  admiration  from  the  valiant  Ice- 
landers. The  story  is  great  and  deeply  impres- 
sive, of  the  struggle  made  by  this  splendid 
little  people  to  wring  a  civilization,  of  which  it 
may  well  be  proud,  out  of  the  most  unfavourable 
natural  conditions  which  can  be  imagined.  What 
a  literature  this  Icelandic  people  can  point  to, 
and  how  high  a  level  of  culture,  as  the  Sagas 
of  the  Edda  testify.  How  small  in  comparison 
appear  the  achievements  of  the  races  of  South 
America,  with  all  their  advantages  of  land  and 
climate.  Upon  the  whole  the  white  races  have 
a  great  faculty  for  overcoming  climatic  con- 
ditions ;  this  is  the  physical  foundation  for  the 
call  of  the  European  nations  to  dominate  the 
whole  world  as  one  great  aristocracy. 

Furthermore,  it  is  clear  that  humanity  can 
to  some  extent  alter  the  surface  of  the  earth  by 
the  labours  of  civilization.  This  is  best  shown 
by  its  work  of  destruction.  It  is  obvious  what 
harm  has  been  wrought  by  deforestation  of  lands 
whose  civilization  is  ancient,  where  fruitful 
meadows  have  been  transformed  into  barren 
wastes.  Compare  the  condition  of  the  Balkan 
Peninsula  under  Turkish  rule  with  what  it  was 


206  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

in  the  days  of  the  Hellenes  !  What  was  once 
the  home  of  the  brightest  and  most  beautiful 
civilization,  the  most  joyous  life  and  the  most 
perfect  art,  has  now  become  the  most  pitiable 
country  in  Europe.  The  disappearance  of  the 
magnificent  forests  of  Italy  has  had  a  very 
injurious  effect  upon  her  climate.  We  have  not 
been  able  to  restore  in  two  generations  the 
havoc  wrought  by  the  destruction  of  our  forests 
by  the  French  in  the  Duchy  of  Berg  and  on  the 
left  bank  of  the  Rhine.  The  Latin  has  no  feeling 
for  the  beauty  of  a  forest ;  when  he  takes  his 
repose  in  it  he  lies  upon  his  stomach,  while  we 
rest  upon  our  backs.  We  no  longer  have  the 
mossy  forest  ground  in  the  Hunsriick,  which 
sucked  up  the  water  from  the  sudden  storms  so 
quickly.  Nowadays  when  the  Moselle  runs  down 
in  flood  the  manured  soil  of  the  vineyards  is 
washed  away. 

Certain  instances  can  of  course  be  produced 
to  prove  how  human  cultivation  can  change  for 
the  better  the  natural  conditions  and  the  whole 
character  of  a  country,  and  how  population  may 
influence  climate.  It  is  not  necessary  to  take 
the  observations  of  Caesar  and  Tacitus  upon 
the  perpetual  fogs  of  Germany  quite  literally, 
but  it  is  certain  that  the  clearing  of  numberless 
forests  and  the  draining  of  marshes  have  had  an 
effect,  and  that  our  climate  is  much  less  damp 
now  than  it  was  in  Caesar's  time.  Different 
nations  can,  in  the  course  of  history,  make  a 
very  different  thing  out  of  the  same  country. 
The  Mississippi  has  always  been  the  same  noble 
waterway  that  it  is  to-day,  but  it  was  no  great 


EXAMPLE  OF  ENGLAND  207 

trade -route  while  only  the  Red  Indians  dwelt 
upon  its  banks. 

Even  the  same  geographical  conditions  have 
sometimes  contributed  towards  different  develop- 
ments of  national  civilization.  The  history  of 
England  is  a  good  example.  England  has  always 
been  an  island,  but  how  various  has  been  the 
influence  of  its  insularity  at  different  times. 
In  the  days  of  the  Northern  Sea-Kings,  when  the 
Vikings  ruled  the  sea,  an  island  was  more  exposed 
to  hostile  raids  than  the  mainland.  A  whole- 
some stirring -up  of  the  various  ethnographical 
elements  ensued,  and  that  admixture  of  races 
became  possible  which  is  the  essential  foundation 
of  England's  modern  history.  In  later  days, 
when  sea  piracy  was  at  an  end,  and  the  land  more 
thickly  peopled,  Shakespeare  was  able  to  talk 
of  the  silver  wall  behind  which  England  could 
abide  calm  and  secure.  The  same  applies  to-day, 
and  so  it  happens  that  in  modern  times  this  very 
same  insular  position  has  enabled  the  national 
development  to  unfold  practically  undisturbed. 

We  see  further  how  the  contrast  between 
the  south-east  and  north-west  of  the  country 
has  run  through  the  centuries  of  English  history. 
In  the  fertile  low  country  of  the  south-east,  the 
earliest  in  cultivation,  lay  the  capital,  the  great 
universities,  the  palaces  of  the  bishops,  the 
castles  of  the  nobility.  Here  was  the  natural 
soil  of  old  England  while  the  north  and  west 
were  still  half  barbarian.  The  difference  between 
north  and  south  is  comparatively  less  than  the 
difference  of  altitudes,  which  is  very  noticeable 
in  the  sea- air  of  England,  where  mountains  of 


208  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

moderate  height  have  a  fairly  severe  climate. 
The  north-west,  however,  is  hilly,  and  civilization 
was  slower  to  permeate  in  consequence.  It 
was  always  the  stronghold  of  reaction  in  ancient 
England  ;  its  ruggedness  made  protest  against 
the  civilization  of  the  south-east.  During  the 
Civil  War  the  Stuarts  drew  the  most  of  their 
adherents  from  among  the  rude  and  simple 
dwellers  in  the  north-west,  while  the  polished 
south  ranged  itself  upon  the  side  of  the  Parlia- 
ment. Then  came  the  eighteenth  century  with 
its  discovery  of  the  marvellous  and  unsuspected 
natural  riches  of  England.  The  whole  character 
of  the  north-west  was  changed  by  the  knowledge 
of  the  great  deposits  of  coal  and  iron  lying  side 
by  side.  To-day  it  is  the  seat  of  Radicalism, 
the  home  of  the  working  classes,  and  the  south 
country  with  its  aristocratic  tradition  has  become 
almost  conservative  in  comparison  —  so  mar- 
vellous has  been  the  fundamental  alteration  in 
the  old  distinctions. 

The  study  of  the  discovery  of  natural  re- 
sources by  mankind  is  of  remarkable  interest. 
It  may  be  generally  said  of  Germany  that  the 
Central  Plateau  was  civilized  earlier  than  the 
low-lying  lands,  and  that  these  plains  have  for 
that  very  reason  still  got  a  great  future  before 
them.  It  is  not  hard  even  for  a  half-savage 
people  to  recognize  the  water-power  of  a  mountain 
stream;  such  gifts  of  Nature  lie,  as  it  were,  to 
be  picked  up.  Those  of  the  plain  of  North 
Germany  are  less  easy  to  perceive,  and  even  yet 
are  not  fully  recognized,  and  for  this  reason  a 
great  future  lies  before  it.  Those  parts  of  North 


NATURE  AND  CIVILIZATION          209 

Germany  have  already  been  far  more  populated 
during  the  last  two  generations  than  the  uplands 
of  Central  and  Southern  Germany. 

Let  us  not  forget  that  the  domestic  animals 
requisite  for  any  given  kind  of  civilization  are 
transported  by  men,  as  are  also  all  kinds  of 
plants,  from  one  climate  to  another,  and  natural- 
ized in  their  new  home.  The  camel  seems  a 
necessary  feature  of  the  limitless  African  deserts, 
and  yet  it  was  first  brought  there  by  the  Arabs. 
We  can  hardly  picture  to  ourselves  the  Gaucho 
of  the  South  American  Pampas  except  riding 
upon  his  long-maned,  fiery  mustang,  fleeing  with 
the  speed  of  wind  through  the  limitless  plains  ; 
yet  the  old  inhabitants  of  the  Pampas  had  no 
horses  before  the  Spaniards  brought  them.  The 
spikes  of  the  aloe  seem  to  us  to-day  the  in- 
evitable ornament  of  the  gleaming  marble  villas 
on  the  Mediterranean  shores,  and  yet  it  is  really 
a  stranger  to  that  soil. 

Men  have  it  much  in  their  power,  then,  to 
alter  the  character  of  the  land  in  which  they 
dwell,  in  many  and  important  ways.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  influence  of  Nature  upon  human 
life  will  always  remain  a  very  strong  one.  She 
has  an  ungracious  aspect  which  can  only  be 
withstood  by  nations  which  are  both  physically 
and  morally  very  strong.  Archangel  can  never 
rival  the  high  civilization  of  Iceland  because 
the  Russians  are  settled  there.  But  sometimes 
the  country  where  Nature  has  been  niggardly 
contains  richer  elements  of  culture  than  the 
luxuriant  lands  of  the  South.  The  abrupt 
changes  of  the  seasons  and  the  long,  hard  winters 

VOL.  i  p 


210  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

engender  a  certain  manly  earnestness  in  the 
spirit  of  the  North,  an  inward  contemplation 
which  is  lacking  in  the  South.  It  is  quite  accord- 
ing to  Nature  that  the  northern  temper  should 
be  the  deeper  and  the  fuller.  The  mildness 
of  the  southern  climate  and  the  rich  produce 
of  the  soil  make  the  southerner  soft  .and  lazy  ; — 
there  are  some  places  where  the  labour  of  two  days 
supplies  the  livelihood  for  the  whole  week.  Who 
will  dare  to  blame  the  dwellers  under  the  deep 
blue  southern  skies  if  they  pass  the  remaining 
days  in  delicious  idleness,  while  their  northern 
brother  has  to  toil  and  moil  through  six  days  of 
rain  or  shine  to  win  an  existence  for  himself  ? 

The  sensuality  of  the  southern  races  goes 
hand  in  hand  with  this  indolence.  Women  come 
to  maturity  comparatively  early  in  these  parts 
of  the  world,  and  the  southerner,  by  nature 
very  sexually  inclined,  practises  polygamy.  Any 
person  who  realizes  what  an  influence  family 
life  has  upon  the  civilization  of  a  people,  will 
realize  that  polygamy  must  be  a  great  moral 
misfortune  for  a  nation.  Slavery  is  the  accom- 
paniment of  the  harem,  and  this  leads  to  other 
political  conditions  which  are  incompatible  with 
liberty. 

Thus  we  see  how  climate  influences  very 
closely  both  economic  life  and  the  life  of  the 
intellect. 

Our  manufacturing  industry  of  to-day  is  only 
possible  in  a  temperate  climate.  The  materialists 
therefore  say,  with  their  customary  elegance,  that 
in  the  course  of  history  the  devourers  of  beer  and 
butter  overcame  the  devourers  of  wine  and  oil. 


INDUSTRY  AND  CLIMATE  211 

But  neither  butter  nor  oil  are  at  the  root  of  this 
difference,  which  turns  upon  modern  industry 
and  the  kind  of  climate  it  requires.  If  we  are 
seeking  for  laws  on  this  subject  it  is  clear 
that  wealth  in  means  of  enjoyment,  which  are 
immediately  consumed,  is  less  important  for 
civilization  than  the  material  of  production 
which  supports  human  labour.  Take  America 
as  an  instance.  The  Conquistadors  all  turned 
to  the  warm  lands  of  the  south,  but  the  wealth 
lay  in  the  north,  which  looked  so  unpromising, 
but  contained  all  the  requisites  for  production, 
the  mighty  coal-seams,  etc.,  which  bring  riches 
far  sooner  than  do  the  means  of  luxury. 

Judged  by  this  standard  we  once  more  see 
how  wonderfully  England  is  favoured  by  Nature. 
Both  its  position  and  its  configuration  are  very 
enviable.  The  climate  is  mild  and  damp,  which 
ensures  a  ripening  of  the  crops  far  beyond  what 
we  can  look  for  in  our  eastward  land.  The 
English  farmer  is  only  cut  off  from  work  upon 
his  land  for  about  four  weeks  of  the  year,  whereas 
in  Germany  he  must  make  holiday  almost  all 
the  winter.  The  island  position  contributes  to 
this,  also  the  formation  of  the  coast,  the  shortness 
of  the  rivers  and  their  accessibility  to  the  ebb 
and  flow  of  the  tides.  A  little  distance  above 
London  the  Thames  is  a  pretty  little  meadow 
stream,  but  below  London  it  becomes  a  mighty 
river,  navigable  by  great  ships.  A  courageous 
and  industrious  people  are  bound  to  become 
great  and  powerful  under  such  conditions. 

No  gift  of  Nature  which  concerns  the  geo- 
graphical conditions  of  States  is  more  valuable 


212  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

than  a  seaboard.  But  this,  too,  depends  upon 
whether  a  nation  understands  how  to  use  this 
advantage.  The  Spartans  possessed  it  quite 
as  much  as  the  Athenians,  but  they  always 
remained  an  inland  State,  while  Athens  grew 
to  be  a  great  sea-power.  It  is  safe  to  say  that 
in  the  long  run  a  great  development  is  impossible 
for  a  State  without  access  to  the  sea.  It  is  the 
first  necessity  for  liberty  and  independence. 
This  is  so  obvious  a  truth  that  it  provides  the 
explanation  for  whole  epochs  of  history.  It  is 
the  key  to  the  antagonism  between  Poland  and 
Germany.  A  deadly  enmity  which  no  one  could 
appease  arose  because  the  German  coloniza- 
tion extended  so  far  eastwards  along  the  coast, 
while  the  country  behind  remained  Slavonic. 
Poland  was  obliged  to  try  to  get  possession  of 
the  mouths  of  her  rivers,  while  the  Germans 
could  not  afford  to  let  them  go.  Thus  an  un- 
avoidable geographical  conflict  of  interests  arose. 
Every  youthful  energetic  nation  presses  merci- 
lessly forward  to  the  sea.  The  restoration  of  her 
old  possessions  on  the  coast  was  the  first  demand 
made  by  Hungary  when  she  had  enforced  the 
Dual  System  in  1867  ;  she  obtained  it  through 
the  weakness  of  Austria,  and  got  her  harbour  of 
Fiume. 

All  this  is  expression  of  a  natural  instinct.  The 
sea  is  a  strengthening  influence  upon  national 
morale,  and  sea-faring  peoples  are  seldom  otherwise 
than  free.  There  is  scarcely  any  human  calling 
so  intolerant  of  inefficiency,  nor  any  where  men's 
powers  find  larger  scope.  The  sailor's  profession 
is  essentially  democratic  in  asking  and  judging 


GERMANY  AND  SEA  POWER        213 

according  to  results  alone.  When  we  compare 
Sparta  with  Athens  we  see  clearly  how  the  sea 
power  of  Athens  worked  upon  the  whole  character 
of  the  State,  in  contrast  to  the  land-locked 
Sparta,  whose  spirit  never  won  a  wide  horizon. 

The  purely  inland  policy  of  the  House  of 
Hapsburg  is  chiefly  to  blame  for  our  cramped 
conditions  in  Germany.  Then  appeared  the 
meteoric  genius  of  Wallenstein,  when  the  idea 
came  to  him  of  making  a  German  harbour  out 
of  the  Jahdebusen,  and  of  constructing  a  canal 
between  the  North  Sea  and  the  Baltic.  Nature 
has  not  treated  Germany  generously  in  these 
respects.  The  Baltic  is  practically  an  inland 
sea,  as  is  proved  by  the  little  influence  which 
it  has  upon  the  dwellers  on  its  shores.  A  little 
way  inland  from  the  coast,  Pomerania  has  lost 
all  trace  of  being  a  country  by  the  sea.  Shoals 
make  our  North  Sea  coasts  the  worst  that  can 
be  imagined.  All  the  conditions  are  as  unfavour- 
able as  possible,  but  they  show  us,  nevertheless, 
how  far  mankind  can  overcome  natural  obstacles. 
In  spite  of  them  this  Germany  of  ours  was  once 
the  greatest  of  the  Sea  Powers,  and,  God  willing, 
so  she  will  be  again. 

So  far  as  geological  conditions  are  concerned, 
mountain  ranges  of  moderate  height  are  an 
advantage,  generally  speaking,  in  so  far  as  they 
make  natural  boundaries  without  interfering 
too  much  with  communication.  Mountains  in- 
side a  country  have  a  localizing  and  individual- 
izing effect.  South  Germany,  as  compared  with 
the  north,  gives  us  an  instructive  example  of 
this.  While  the  life,  the  habits,  and  even  the 


214  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

peculiarities  of  speech  are  more  or  less  alike  in 
the  northern  plains,  they  exhibit  the  most  re- 
markable differences  in  the  various  districts  of 
the  south,  where  we  find  totally  distinct  dialects, 
manners,  and  customs  existing  quite  close  to 
each  other.  The  Federal  Constitution  of  Switzer- 
land is  partly  the  result  of  the  physical  configura- 
tion of  the  country,  although  the  historical 
events,  which  assembled  three  different  nations 
on  the  same  soil,  have  also  played  their  part  in 
it.  It  is  absurd  to  assume  that  the  geological 
and  geographical  features  of  a  country  are  the 
sole  factors  in  its  history,  for  there  are  many 
others  always  to  be  reckoned  with  as  well. 

When  we  look  at  the  map  of  Italy  we  see 
how  the  great  plain  of  Lombardy,  which  lies 
in  the  north,  uninterrupted  by  any  serious 
natural  obstacles,  seems  formed  for  the  policy 
of  a  great  State.  The  south,  on  the  other  hand, 
is  a  mountainous  region,  whose  districts  are  so 
far  divided  by  nature  from  each  other  that 
communication  between  them  is  scanty  and 
difficult  to  this  day.  Here  we  should  have 
expected  to  find  some  such  system  of  Cantons 
as  prevails  in  Switzerland.  History,  however, 
exhibits  the  exact  reverse.  While  the  north 
has  been  the  home  of  the  small  Italian  States, 
the  south  was  very  early  gathered  up  into  a 
great  kingdom,  more  distinctively  known  as  the 
"  Regno."  This  is  an  instance  of  States  con- 
structed in  defiance  of  the  natural  conditions. 
Again,  let  us  look  once  more  at  Switzerland. 
There  could  be  no  natural  boundary  more  marked 
than  the  mighty  range  of  the  Gotthardt  Alps  ; 


GEOGRAPHY  AND  HISTORY        215 

it  is  a  geographical  and  ethnographical  division 
of  peoples,  and  yet  human  history  has  brought 
it  to  pass  that  this  strongest  of  all  natural  barriers 
should  lie  in  the  middle  of  a  State,  and  be  to 
all  appearance  likely  to  continue  so. 

What  is  the  natural  centre-point  of  Spain  ? 
Certainly  not  the  bare  and  rugged  uplands  of 
Castile ;  it  should  be  sought  rather  in  Barcelona 
or  Seville.  It  was  men  themselves,  the  hard 
stern  efficiency  of  the  Castilian  race,  which  made 
these  highlands  the  home  of  Spanish  history. 
Therefore,  when  we  study  the  influence  of  the 
same  natural  conditions  upon  history,  we  never 
find  a  simple  relation  of  cause  and  effect,  but 
rather  a  continual  interaction  between  Nature 
and  Man. 

The  great  river-valleys  are  usually  the  prin- 
cipal abodes  of  civilization.  From  the  very 
earliest  times  it  has  followed  the  course  of  the 
large  streams,  the  Hoang-ho,  the  Yangse-kiang, 
the  Indus,  or  the  Nile.  Germany,  which  has 
been  so  shabbily  treated  by  Nature  in  other 
ways,  may  call  herself  lucky  in  this  respect,  when 
she  has  once  fulfilled  her  destiny  and  possessed 
herself  of  her  river  from  end  to  end.  Our  Rhine 
remains  the  King  of  Rivers.  What  great  things 
have  ever  happened  on  the  banks  of  the  Danube  ? 
The  Rhine,  on  the  contrary,  is  teeming  with 
historic  life,  a  very  treasure-house  of  memories 
from  the  earliest  days  of  the  German  race  up  to 
modern  times.  It  is  a  priceless  natural  possession, 
although  by  our  own  fault  we  have  allowed  its 
most  material  value  to  fall  into  alien  hands,  and 
it  must  be  the  unceasing  endeavour  of  German 


216  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

policy  to  win  back  the  mouths  of  the  river.  A 
purely  political  connection  is  not  necessary, 
since  the  Dutch  have  developed  into  an  inde- 
pendent nation,  but  an  economic  Union  is 
absolutely  indispensable,  and  we  are  much  too 
bashful  when  we  dare  not  say  plainly  that  we 
consider  the  entrance  of  Holland  into  our  Customs 
Union  as  necessary  for  us  as  our  daily  bread. 
Nowhere  in  the  world  is  there  as  much  declama- 
tion about  Chauvinism  as  in  Germany,  and 
nowhere  is  so  little  of  it  to  be  found.  We  hesitate 
to  express  even  the  most  natural  demands  that 
a  nation  can  make  for  itself. 

Variety   in    the   physical    configuration    of   a 
country  is   of  great  importance  for  the   State, 
because  it  permits  of  variety  in  economic  activities. 
A  certain  balance  between  the  life  of  town  and 
country  is  tremendously  important  for  healthy 
development.      Fortunately  we  Germans  are  by 
predisposition   a   nation   of   peasants,    and   this 
sound   and   sturdy  natural  tendency  is   always 
visible  amongst  us.     We  must  not  be  too  much 
depressed  by  the  modern  allurements  of  the  big 
towns  for  the  country  folk.     We  have  all  read 
of  the  wickedness  of  large  cities,  as  shown  by  the 
number  of  illegitimate  births  which  are  registered 
in  them.     But  all  that  is  quite  vague.     The  first 
thing  to  discover  is  what  kind  of  people  live  in 
a  big  town.     The  number  of  young  people  who 
are  unmarried,  and  of  marriageable  age,  is  much 
larger  here  than  in  the  country.     A  far  more 
real   difference  arises   from   that  most  perverse 
form  of  human  stupidity,  which  unnatural  con- 
ditions  of  life   produce  :     that   dream-world   of 


TOWN  AND  COUNTRY  217 

the  intellect,  which  may  be  shortly  defined  as  the 
Berlin  temperament.  It  is  in  the  very  air,  and 
is  greatly  fostered  by  the  large  number  of  young 
people  who  live  here. 

This  must  be  accepted  freely,  as  part  of  the 
natural  order  of  things.  Neither  may  we  pro- 
nounce too  quickly  any  condemnation  of  the 
moral  conditions.  It  is  a  very  important  con- 
sideration that  of  the  adults  in  Berlin  only  an 
average  of  33  per  cent  are  married,  while  in  the 
country  it  is  70  per  cent.  The  number  of  ille- 
gitimate births  in  the  towns  must  consequently 
be  greater  than  in  the  country  districts.  The 
calculation  must  not  be  made  by  dividing  the 
total  number  of  the  population  by  the  total 
number  of  these  births  ;  but  the  number  of  un- 
married girls  in  the  towns  and  in  the  country 
should  be  divided  by  the  number  of  illegitimate 
births,  and  then  it  will  be  found  that  the  con- 
ditions in  the  cities  are  no  worse  than  in  many 
country  districts. 

In  any  case,  it  is  clear  that  the  strongly 
exciting  stir  of  civilization  in  a  large  town  is  as 
indispensable  a  part  of  it  as  is  the  simple  health 
and  freshness  of  rural  life. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  contrast  between  the 
different  ways  of  living  must  not  be  too  marked, 
or  they  will  become  dividing  influences,  and 
hindrances  to  political  unity.  France  has  been 
very  kindly  treated  by  Nature  in  this  respect. 
Great  as  the  difference  is  between  Provence  and 
the  breezy  Norman  coast,  the  climate  of  the 
country  as  a  whole  is  fairly  even,  and  the  senti- 
ment of  visible  unity  is  easy  to  maintain.  For 


218  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

us  Germans,  on  the  other  hand,  the  task  of 
establishing  a  political  unity  is  made  difficult  by 
our  geographical  contrasts.  It  was  fortunate  that 
Prussia,  the  strongest  of  all  our  States,  contained 
some  of  the  most  tremendous  of  these  within  her 
own  borders,  but  was  able  to  overcome  them  by 
her  own  energies.  Think  of  the  difference  between 
the  rugged  Lithuania,  where  the  wild  forests 
still  shelter  the  bison,  and  the  smiling  valleys  of 
the  Rhine  and  the  Moselle,  with  their  luxuriant 
vineyards,  their  gay  and  active  population.  We 
should  surely  pardon  a  shudder  to  the  honest 
denizen  of  Markgrafler  in  Freiburg  if  it  was 
suggested  to  him  that  he  should  be  transplanted 
to  Gumbinnen. 

The  geometric  formation  of  a  country  is 
another  point  of  political  importance  for  the 
State.  If  it  does  not  make  a  compact  whole  the 
State  must  try  to  round  it  off  more  conveniently. 
This,  however,  only  applies  to  great  States,  who 
are  keenly  conscious  of  themselves,  and  take 
pride  in  the  belief  in  their  great  future.  They 
cannot  allow  a  raggedness  in  their  territory. 
Separation  between  the  dominions  of  a  State 
ceases  to  be  possible  in  the  era  of  a  living  political 
feeling,  as  the  history  of  Austria  shows.  As 
long  as  the  patrimonial  conception  prevailed, 
which  saw  nothing  more  in  the  State  than  the 
land  and  people  belonging  to  a  great  ruling 
House,  it  was  endurable  that  Spain,  the  Nether- 
lands, and  the  Magyars  should  all  obey  the  same 
lord.  But  gradually  the  separation  came.  The 
far  distant  Belgium  became  more  and  more 
a  millstone  round  the  neck  of  Austria ;  the 


FRONTIERS  219 

western  and  eastern  halves  divided,  and  the 
lands  between  fell  into  other  hands. 

There  is  a  certain  natural  necessity  and 
historical  reason  in  this,  and  this  law  of  the 
necessity  for  geographical  coherence  is  so  patent 
that  we  are  astonished  at  the  short-sighted  policy 
of  the  Vienna  Congress,  which  left  Prussia,  out 
of  envy,  so  ridiculously  and  raggedly  misshapen. 
A  powerful  State  could  not  exist  under  these 
conditions.  Prussia  had  no  choice  between  re- 
signing her  possessions  in  the  west,  or  ruling, 
either  directly  or  indirectly,  over  the  inter- 
vening territory.  The  after-effects  of  this  old 
heroic  temper  still  linger  everywhere  among  our 
people,  even  though  we  are  under  a  Govern- 
ment which  considers  that  our  State  is  too  large 
already.1 

The  kind  of  boundaries  which  a  State  possesses 
are  more  important  nowadays  than  in  any  former 
period  of  history.  The  power  of  concentrating 
forces  upon  them  is  an  inestimable  advantage 
in  an  era  of  great  wars.  There  is  no  doubt  that 
the  sea  is  the  best  boundary  that  any  country 
can  have.  The  principle  that  the  high  seas 
should  be  free  to  all  is  a  product  of  the  instinct 
of  self-preservation  existent  in  every  State,  but 
every  country  polices  its  own  coasts,  so  far  as 
its  military  power  can  reach,  that  is  to  say  within 
the  range  of  its  guns.  The  exact  extent  of  this 
dominion  has  become  somewhat  doubtful,  but 
new  conferences  are  to  be  held  upon  the  point. 
The  general  principle  will  remain  that  the  power 
of  a  State  over  the  sea  will  not  go  beyond  the 

1  Lecture  delivered  in  November  1892. 


220  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

reach  of  its  physical  ability  to  maintain  it.  The 
sea  is  not  a  dividing  element  only,  for  it  also 
brings  the  nations  together ;  therefore  a  coast 
boundary  is  the  most  politically  advantageous 
of  any,  as  the  position  of  England  clearly  shows, 
although  an  absolutely  insular  situation  may 
lull  a  nation  into  a  sense  of  security  which  may 
be  regarded  with  misgiving  when  it  causes  its 
military  strength  to  dwindle. 

Mountain  ranges  are  good  frontiers  when 
they  do  not  absolutely  shut  off  communication. 
The  Vosges  are  a  suitable  and  natural  boundary 
between  France  and  ourselves,  because  the  crest 
of  the  range  coincides  with  the  line  on  which  the 
different  languages  begin.  Rivers,  on  the  other 
hand,  have  always  been  bad  frontiers,  set  up  by 
human  caprice  in  defiance  of  Nature.  A  navi- 
gable river  is  not  a  dividing,  but  rather  a  uniting 
factor;  moreover,  its  many  curves  may  make  it 
an  impossible  boundary  line.  Thus  the  Moselle 
could  never  be  taken  as  a  limit,  and  the  same 
objection  applies  to  the  Rhine,  in  spite  of  its 
great  breadth.  Wherever  it  is  navigable  the 
intercourse  between  its  banks  is  so  active  that 
this  alone  must  prove  the  absurdity  of  such  a 
frontier.  We  should  read  how  Goethe  visited 
the  Rhineland  in  1814  after  its  liberation,  and 
learn  from  him  what  were  the  feelings  of  the 
dwellers  on  German  soil  on  both  banks  of  the 
river.  German  sentiment  was  not  particularly 
strong  in  those  days,  but  the  universal  joy  which 
people  felt  at  belonging  to  each  other  once  more 
was  visible  everywhere.  Moreover,  the  exact 
line  of  demarcation  is  difficult  to  fix  in  the  case 


EXTENSION  OF  TERRITORY        221 

of  a  river.  Legally,  it  lies  in  the  geometrical 
centre  of  the  bed  of  the  stream. 

Mountains  as  unprofitably  high  as  the  Hima- 
layas separate  nations  in  a  way  which  hinders 
civilization.  Deserts  do  the  same,  through  the 
great  difficulties  which  they  put  in  the  way  of 
communication,  while  they  still  require  military 
stations  to  keep  their  borders  secure.  The 
nomadic  peoples  who  inhabit  them  are  constantly 
forcing  the  State  into  warfare,  for  no  sooner  is 
one  tribe  suppressed  than  another  makes  dis- 
turbances. Thus  Russia  is  perpetually  fighting 
in  her  Asiatic  dominions. 

A  great  expansion  of  the  territory  of  the  State 
is  desirable  in  itself  on  grounds  of  national 
economy  as  well  as  for  military  reasons.  Pesti- 
lence, floods,  or  a  failure  of  crops  would  not  be 
likely  to  befall  every  part  of  a  large  country  at  the 
same  time,  so  that  in  this  way  also  an  equalization 
becomes  possible.  It  is  evident  that  a  certain 
extent  of  territory  is  valuable  for  military  defence, 
it  is  in  itself  a  guarantee  of  security,  but  it  is 
quite  possible  for  a  State  to  be  too  large,  especi- 
ally in  relation  to  its  population.  This  is  the 
unnatural  position  of  Russia,  where  the  proverb 
runs,  "  Russia  is  wide  and  the  Czar  is  far  away." 
Uniformity  of  administration  is  much  hampered 
and  the  military  establishment  is  also  made  more 
difficult,  since  the  size  of  the  Army  is  dependent 
upon  the  number  of  the  population. 

Some  States,  on  the  other  hand,  have  not  yet 
attained  their  full  growth,  nor  become  possessed 
of  the  whole  extent  of  territory  which  they  must 
eventually  claim.  This  sometimes  gives  rise 


222  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

to  very  complicated  conditions.  The  United 
States  of  America  could  never  have  rested  until 
they  reached  the  western  coast,  and  their  geo- 
graphical position  justifies  their  present  claim  to 
possess  the  whole  of  North  America.  But  these 
desires  bring  elements  of  immaturity,  unrest,  and 
fermentation  into  a  State. 

Lastly,  a  State  may  be  too  small  for  its 
historical  task,  as  was  Prussia  under  Frederick 
the  Great,  and  up  till  the  year  1866.  Then  the 
word  went  round  that  Prussia  must  grow  if 
she  was  to  live,  and  the  results  have  proved  that 
it  was  true. 

Our  verdict  upon  the  climate  and  natural 
features  of  a  country  brings  us  to  the  next  point 
for  consideration,  the  conditions  of  material 
existence  which  depend  upon  them. 

Morals  and  pure  aesthetics  take  the  second 
place,  but  are  not  to  be  undervalued  upon  that 
account.  The  damp  foggy  atmosphere  of 
England  have  done  no  good  to  the  inhabitants 
of  that  country  ;  there  are  days  in  London  when 
the  fog  is  so  thick  that  spleen  is  in  the  very  air. 
Above  all,  the  land  lacks  wine,  and  that  is  a  very 
important  factor  for  a  gay  and  untrammelled 
civilization.  There  is  a  certain  truth  in  the 
proud  boast  of  our  Rhenish  country  folk  that 
they  have  wine  in  their  bones.  The  intellectual 
life  is  stimulated  by  a  beverage  which  is  only  a 
light  intoxicant  and  does  not  produce  the  bestial 
drunkenness  which  comes  from  drinking  spirits. 
The  true  Rhinelander  would  never  fall  into  the 
beer-besotted  state  which  prevails  with  us. 

The  climate,  this  want  of  wine,  and  lack  of 


NATURE  AND  CULTURE  223 

beautiful  scenery  have  all  been  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  English  culture.  Although  England 
can  point  to  a  really  great  literature,  it  has 
produced  nothing  outstanding  either  in  music 
or  the  fine  arts ;  poetry  is  in  fact  much  less 
dependent  upon  natural  surroundings  than  either 
of  these.  Nay  more,  Nature  may  rise  to  a  height 
of  beauty  and  sublimity  which  is  actually  oppres- 
sive to  mankind.  How  little  artistic  greatness, 
comparatively  speaking,  has  been  born  among 
the  splendid  ranges  of  the  Alps. 

Walter  von  der  Vogelweide  was  the  only  great 
poet  of  the  Tyrol,  if  indeed  that  was  his  place 
of  origin,  and  Switzerland  has  only  lately  pro- 
duced a  true  poet  in  the  person  of  Gottfried 
Keller.  In  fact,  mountain  countries  have  rarely 
been  the  home  of  the  highest  culture.  Their 
simpler  conditions  foster  the  sportsmanlike 
qualities,  and  a  sturdy  manhood  with  a  more 
limited  outlook.  It  is  the  regions  of  the  lower 
hills,  the  smiling  valleys  of  Swabia  and  Franconia 
or  the  fertile  uplands  of  Thuringia,  which  have 
produced  their  full  quota  of  artists  and  poets. 
The  soul  is  lost  to  poetry  which  does  not  feel  its 
inspiration  in  Heidelberg  or  Bonn,  where  the 
mood  of  Nature  is  cheering  and  uplifting  to  man, 
without  being  too  great  for  him. 

The  culture  of  Berlin  is  a  clear  instance  of  the 
way  in  which  the  aesthetic  conditions  of  natural 
position  influence  the  general  civilization  of  the 
people.  Lying,  as  it  does,  between  the  districts 
watered  by  the  Oder  and  the  Elbe,  the  situation 
of  the  town  is  economically  very  favourable. 
No  other  inland  place  has  such  marvellously 


224  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

good  waterways,  and  the  tonnage  of  Berlin's 
shipping  is  greater  than  that  of  Hamburg  and 
Bremen  put  together.  Therefore  we  cannot 
call  the  position  of  our  Empire's  capital  either 
unnatural  or  artificial,  for  the  material  conditions 
of  its  life  are  sound  and  healthy.  Even  in  the 
years  between  1806  and  1813,  when  the  half- 
bankrupt  State  had  to  leave  everything  to  chance, 
the  population  of  Berlin  continued  to  increase. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  to  be  deplored  that  its 
climate  and  surroundings  are  so  devoid  of  charm. 
This  tells  upon  the  character  of  its  society  by 
making  its  whole  tendency  so  uncommonly 
prosaic.  Artists,  and  men  of  really  sensitive 
temperament,  will  always  find  it  difficult  to  live 
for  long  in  Berlin.  The  aristocracy  only  come 
there  in  winter,  but  the  Berlin  plutocrats  display 
the  materialism  of  wealth  in  particularly  crude 
and  unlovely  forms.  These  matters  are  insepar- 
able from  the  purely  aesthetic  natural  conditions. 
If  there  was  more  beauty  in  the  life  of  Nature, 
society  also  would  breathe  a  purer  air. 

We  are  always  brought  back  to  the  old  con- 
clusion that  our  century  shows  a  wide-spread 
stupidity  among  persons  of  education.  People 
have  never  travelled  so  senselessly  as  they  do 
now.  Odysseus  journeyed  long  ago,  as  a  reason- 
able man  should,  when  Homer  could  say  of  him : 

7ro\\a)v  avOpanrwv    iBev    acrrea    Kal  voov  eyvo).       Instead 

of  this,  people  now  wander  vacantly  in  "  lovely 
neighbourhoods "  so-called ;  they  install  them- 
selves in  comfortable  hotels  under  the  manage- 
ment of  a  Limited  Company,  and  slink  out 
occasionally  to  stare  at  the  sun  rising  or  setting. 


THE  MODERN  TRAVELLER          225 

We  often  find  this  seamy  side  to  the  noblest 
spectacles. 

The  enjoyment  of  Nature  has  this  in  common 
with  the  appreciation  of  music,  that  while  both 
are  able  to  uplift  the  real  enthusiasts  into  the 
ideal  heights,  they  both  allow  the  dense  and  the 
dull  to  sit  before  them  with  open  mouth  and 
distended  nostril  and  never  a  thought  behind 
them.  Surely  a  display  of  beauty  and  splendour 
requires  more  than  this.  There  is  no  more 
comfortable  way  of  killing  time  without  mental 
exertion  than  by  gazing  out  over  a  landscape  ; 
but  what  is  the  result  in  the  end  ?  What  does 
the  average  man  of  to-day  really  know  about 
the  world  ?  Only  a  very  few  are  capable  of 
making  one  sensible  remark  about  the  manners, 
customs,  or  arrangements  of  the  inhabitants  of 
the  best-known  tourist  resorts.  No  one  should 
set  out  to  write  German  history  until  he  has 
rummaged  through  the  remotest  corners  of 
Germany,  for  what  he  writes  will  quickly  betray 
whether  his  knowledge  is  real  or  gathered  from 
the  dead  bones  of  books. 

It  still  remains  for  us  to  give  one  glance  at 
the  nation,  regarded  as  the  mass  of  population 
in  the  purely  physical  sense.  Physical  conditions 
of  life,  pure  and  simple,  are  of  more  importance 
than  ever  to  -  day,  and  an  enormous  amount 
depends  upon  the  actual  figures  of  the  census. 

We  have  visible  proof  of  how  the  historical 
character  of  whole  districts  may  be  altered  by 
causes  which  are  simply  physical.  In  Silesia 
the  numerical  proportion  of  the  two  faiths  was 
formerly  such  as  to  place  Protestants  in  a  small 

VOL.  I  Q 


226  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

majority,  and  the  province  was  consequently 
looked  upon  in  Austria  as  in  the  control  of  the 
Opposition.  This  is  now  so  much  altered  that 
in  the  last  two  censuses  the  Catholics  were  more 
numerous  by  1  per  cent.  They  have  the  fecund- 
ity of  the  Riparian  Poles  in  Upper  Silesia  to 
thank  for  this  accession  to  their  numbers.  These 
people  require  no  further  provision  for  matrimony 
than  a  supply  of  potatoes  and  Schnapps  sufficient 
for  two  days.  These  comprise  life  as  they  see 
it,  and  under  this  conception  of  existence  repro- 
duction proceeds  with  that  speed  which  apper- 
tains to  the  brute  creation.  Still  more  tragical 
changes  have  taken  place  in  Geneva,  which  from 
having  once  been  the  Rome  of  Calvinism  has 
now  become  a  Catholic  town,  through  the  influx 
of  Catholic  workmen  from  Savoy.  Thus  the 
Canton  has  assumed  a  character  which  is  a 
complete  contradiction  of  its  traditions.  Augs- 
burg was  likewise  a  Protestant  place,  but  now 
the  Catholic  element  preponderates  in  the  mass 
of  the  working-class  population,  who  are  supple- 
mented by  new-comers  from  the  neighbouring 
towns. 

Still  more  significant  is  the  growth  of  the 
population  when  two  different  races  meet  on 
the  same  soil.  In  Austria,  for  instance,  the 
Slovaks  and  Vlaks  breed  like  rabbits,  and  the 
superior  German  and  Magyar  stocks  are  in  danger 
of  being  swamped  by  the  rising  flood  of  the 
proletariat.  We  see  with  astonishment  that  it 
is  precisely  to  the  lowest  races  that  the  word 
"  proletariat  "  can  be  applied  in  its  literal  mean- 
ing. The  reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  Nations 


ENGLISH  AND  IRISH  227 

of  an  aristocratic  tendency,  with  a  good  peasant 
stock,  a  sturdy  middle  class,  and  a  real  nobility, 
will  always  multiply  much  more  slowly  than 
the  mass  of  the  working  classes.  Marriage  will 
always  be  later  in  the  upper  classes  than  in  the 
lower  strata  of  the  people,  who  consider  position 
and  appearances  little  or  not  at  all.  This  is 
why  the  inferior  nations,  who  live  by  the  humblest 
form  of  labour,  increase  more  rapidly  than  the 
nobler  peoples.  Our  Saxon  country  folk  in 
Siebenblirgen,  who  are  themselves  all  of  the 
upper  class,  have  a  general  term  for  their  servants, 
derived  from  the  word  which  means  "  menial,"  1 
which  they  use  freely  in  speech,  without  the  least 
intention  of  giving  offence.  This  is  because  all 
their  domestics  are  Vlaks,  or  gipsies,  and  utterly 
inferior  to  themselves. 

We  find  the  same  relationship  existing  between 
Irish  and  English.  The  English,  being  an  aristo- 
cratic people,  increased  quickly,  it  is  true,  but 
still  much  more  slowly  than  the  Irish.  There 
was  a  temporary  improvement  during  the  fifty 
years  in  which  two  million  emigrants  left  Ireland, 
but  the  remainder  bred  like  rabbits,  and  the  old 
total  of  population  was  reached  again  a  few  years 
ago.  There  is,  besides,  an  enormous  accretion 
to  the  Irish  element  in  the  United  States.  This 
uncanny  phenomenon  of  an  inferior  race,  ever 
thrusting  its  way  further  into  a  more  advanced 
civilization,  shows  us  what  an  important  factor 
the  purely  physical  aspect  of  population  may  be, 
and  impels  us  to  devote  a  little  time  to  the  study 
of  its  causes  and  effects. 

1  Translator's  Note :  "  Gesindel "  from  "  Gesinde." 


228  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

Let  us  take  first  the  numerical  proportion  of 
the  two  sexes  to  each  other.  Everywhere  there 
are  more  boys  born  than  girls,  but  since  the  infant 
mortality  is  greater  among  them,  and  also  because 
their  later  career  confronts  them  with  more 
dangers,  the  balance  is  redressed,  and  the  result 
is  that  the  number  of  women,  reckoned  collect- 
ively in  civilized  States,  is  slightly  in  excess  of 
the  number  of  men.  Therefore  Nature  herself 
seems  to  demand  monogamy. 

In  the  case  of  the  young  nations,  who  live  upon 
ground  which  has  not  yet  been  divided  up,  and 
where  it  is  in  consequence  easier  to  found  a 
family,  matrimony  is  undertaken  earlier,  and 
the  number  of  children  may  be  large.  Never- 
theless this  great  reproductive  power  of  the 
human  race  is  always  limited  by  the  means  of 
subsistence  which  are  either  immediately  avail- 
able or  in  process  of  creation.  This  was  the 
foundation  for  the  axiom  laid  down  by  the 
Scottish-Highland  cleric  Malthus  in  his  Doctrine 
of  Population,  which  has  exposed  him  to  the 
execration  of  the  Social -Democratic  party.  He 
asserted  that  the  population  increases  by  a 
geometric  progression,  while  their  means  of  sup- 
port can  only  advance  in  arithmetical  progression. 
Consequently  the  former  must  always  be  limited 
by  the  latter.  It  is  not  possible  to  affirm  the 
proportion  between  the  two  with  such  mathe- 
matical exactitude,  but  it  does  contain  a  kernel 
of  truth.  It  is  quite  apparent  that  a  young 
and  energetic  nation,  living  in  healthy  economic 
conditions,  must  always  increase  rapidly.  On 
the  other  hand,  Nature  always  puts  a  certain 


MALTHUSIAN  LAW  229 

check  upon  it;  it  must  be  limited  eventually 
by  the  number  of  men  which  the  soil  can  nourish. 
The  advance  of  science  may  increase  the  means 
of  subsistence,  but  it  cannot  do  so  beyond  a  cer- 
tain point,  and  as  the  population  multiplies  the 
difficulty  of  maintaining  a  family  must  neces- 
sarily become  greater.  This  is  the  truth  under- 
lying the  Malthusian  law. 

It  may  be  generally  stated  that  the  youthful 
nations  increase  through  a  very  large  number 
of  births.  Marriages  take  place  early,  and  are 
therefore  rich  in  children,  although  the  conditions 
under  which  half  -  civilized  peoples  live  cause 
a  disproportionate  number  of  early  deaths. 
Despite  this  the  increase  continues,  on  account 
of  the  high  birth-rate.  There  is  a  different  reason 
for  it  among  civilized  nations.  Among  them, 
especially  in  the  upper  classes,  marriages  are 
later,  and  are  therefore  apparently  less  fruitful. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  these  nations  understand 
better  how  to  protect  life,  and  how  to  lessen  the 
infant  mortality  which  is  so  colossal  among 
savages.  Therefore  their  population  still  in- 
creases, although  fewer  are  born,  because  the 
existing  lives  are  better  tended. 

We  must  beware  of  seeking  for  natural  laws 
in  all  this.  Fallacies  have  been  demonstrated 
from  the  attempt  to  prove  by  these  generally 
correct  observations  that  an  increase  in  the 
average  human  life  must  follow  upon  the  advance 
of  civilization.  Conditions  are  not  always  healthy, 
the  misery  of  the  masses  is  often  fearful,  and 
bitter  want  frequently  hinders  the  increase  of 
the  population  in  the  classes  where  marriages 


230  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

are  early.  The  censuses  which  are  available 
for  us  since  1815  do  not  by  any  means  show  a 
universal  increase  in  the  average  length  of  life. 
In  certain  parts  of  Prussia,  as  the  district  round 
the  Silesian  Hunger  Mountains,  they  even  point 
to  a  decrease,  caused  by  the  very  thing  which 
we  call  civilization,  owing  to  the  cruel  nature 
of  the  local  industry.  It  is  impossible  to  speak 
of  the  blind  action  of  natural  laws  in  these 
matters,  or  of  anything  more  than  the  general 
tendencies  of  civilized  life,  which  may  or  may 
not  find  fulfilment. 

One  of  these  is  the  general  tendency  of  the 
human  race  to  increase  in  a  measure  out  of  all 
proportion  to  the  growth  of  their  means  of 
subsistence.  The  methods  adopted  by  the  various 
nations  to  equalize  the  conflict  between  economic 
prudence  and  the  natural  instinct  for  reproduc- 
tion are  very  significant  of  their  character.  Some, 
like  the  French,  are  born  calculators,  and  import 
the  arithmetical  spirit  even  into  the  kindly 
relations  of  married  life,  where  sentiment,  in- 
tellectual as  well  as  physical,  should  find  its 
proper  sphere.  The  population  has  actually 
decreased  in  some  parts  of  France,  and  in  very 
marked  progression,  which  is  largely  due  to  the 
stinginess  and  cold  calculation  manifested  in 
married  life.  Thus  prosperity,  so  called,  is  pro- 
moted for  the  moment,  but  the  future  of  the 
nation  is  endangered,  and  immorality  and  prosti- 
tution encouraged  among  the  upper  classes. 
The  German  view  of  life  is  entirely  different,  for 
we  hold  that  every  man  should  be  a  man,  and 
place  his  confidence  in  God.  The  German  is 


FRENCH.     GERMANS.     ENGLISH      231 

a  hero  born,  and  believes  that  he  can  hack  and 
hew  his  way  through  life.  Reckoning  and  be- 
grudging are  not  for  him.  In  spite  of  great  infant 
mortality  our  population  grows  at  the  rate  of 
about  1  per  cent  each  year,  and  if  this  increase 
goes  on  undisturbed,  as  it  has  done  for  the  last 
twenty  years,  our  country  will  have  to  support 
more  than  four  hundred  million  inhabitants  in 
two  hundred  years.  Our  infant  death-rate  is 
still  much  too  high,  and  it  is  an  undoubted  stain 
upon  our  civilization  that  it  should  particularly 
affect  the  illegitimate  children.  For  this  reason 
the  French  system  of  two  offspring  has  found 
many  defenders  in  Germany.  Even  Rumelin 
is  much  enamoured  of  it.  Nevertheless,  the 
German  plan  of  having  relatively  large  families 
is  bolder,  freer,  and  more  manly  than  the  ac- 
cursed Latin  niggardliness  which  reigns  in  France. 
The  English  are  in  the  happiest  position. 
The  population  of  that  little  island  has  sent  out 
so  many  offshoots  that  there  are  now  more  than 
a  hundred  million  men  of  English  race.  This 
fact  by  itself  is  enough  to  prove  the  importance 
of  colonies.  A  nation  shows  the  courage  of  its 
faith  in  God  when  it  seeks  to  capture  new  areas  of 
productivity  wherewith  to  nourish  its  increasing 
numbers.  The  way  in  which  these  deeply  serious 
matters  are  talked  of  nowadays  by  those  who 
should  know  better  is  absolutely  dreadful.  A 
new  song  is  sung  in  the  stead  of  the  old  one  : 
"  My  Fatherland  must  smaller  be."  *  This  is 
simply  a  reversal  of  everything.  We  must,  and 
will,  take  our  share  in  the  domination  of  the 

1  Translator's  note :  "  Mein  Vaterland  muss  kleiner  sein." 


232  LAND  AND  PEOPLE 

world  by  the  white  races.  We  have  still  a  very 
great  deal  to  learn  from  England  in  this  respect, 
and  a  Press  which  tries  to  brush  these  serious 
questions  aside  with  a  few  bad  jokes  shows 
that  it  has  no  understanding  of  the  sacredness 
of  our  civilizing  mission.  It  is  a  sound  and 
normal  trait  in  a  civilized  nation  to  avert  the 
existing  dangers  of  over- population  by  coloniza- 
tion on  a  large  scale.  This  puts  no  check  upon 
nature,  and  opens  up  a  large  sphere  for  healthy 
energy  which  augments  the  national  strength 
of  the  mother  country  at  the  same  time.  For 
all  the  talk  about  the  possible  separation  of  the 
colonies  is  seen  to  be  nonsense  when  we  consider 
what  the  importance  even  of  emancipated 
colonies  is  to  the  parent  State.  It  is  impossible 
to  exaggerate  the  material  and  moral  advantages 
of  such  a  national  increase. 

There  is,  however,  also  a  kind  of  internal 
colonization  to  which  the  State  has  not  yet 
devoted  enough  attention.  It  is  obvious  that 
Germany  could  support  a  much  thicker  popula- 
tion than  it  does  at  present.  It  should,  first  of 
all,  be  more  fairly  divided  up.  It  is  a  token  of 
bad  conditions  of  civilization  when  emigration 
takes  place  to  any  great  extent  from  the  thinly 
peopled  provinces  of  the  north  -  east.  When 
these  colonies  were  first  settled,  there  was  an 
indefinite  impulse  to  journey  eastwards,  similar 
to  the  mysterious  yearning  which  came  later 
towards  America,  and  an  El  Dorado  in  the  West. 
Reason  preaches  in  vain  when  the  masses  are 
filled  with  such  visions  as  these.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  conditions  of  land  tenure  have  greatly 


COLONIZATION  AND  POPULATION     233 

promoted  emigration  in  the  north-east,  and  the 
State  will  sooner  or  later  be  obliged  to  undertake 
great  social-political  measures  to  deal  with  the 
question.  The  domains  which  it  fortunately 
possesses  in  that  region  will  afford  it  the  means 
for  coming  to  some  perfectly  friendly  arrange- 
ment. 

The  liberty  to  settle  afforded  by  modern  legis- 
lation, which  treats  land  and  soil  simply  as  a 
commodity,  places  the  greatest  obstacles  in  the 
path  of  interior  colonization,  because  it  affords 
no  security  that  the  real  settlers  will  continue 
to  occupy  their  new  habitations.  Thus  the 
fanatics  who  advocate  free  buying  and  selling 
are  passionately  opposed  to  hereditary  tenancy, 
although  history  teaches  us  how  Frederick  the 
Great  settled  many  thousands  of  industrious 
human  beings  on  land  capable  of  cultivation  by 
hereditary  tenancy,  and  thereby  greatly  pro- 
moted the  welfare  of  his  country. 


VII 
THE  FAMILY 

THE  simplest  and  most  natural  form  of  human 
gregariousness  is  sexual  companionship,  and  we 
have  here  one  of  the  deepest  problems  of  morals, 
which  will  never  cease  to  arise  in  new  forms  to 
occupy  men's  thoughts  and  influence  their  actions. 
Aristotle  knew  what  he  was  about  when  he  said 
in  his  naive  genial  fashion  that  when  the  con- 
cerns of  women  are  ill- ordered  half  the  State  is 
endangered.  The  moral  existence  of  every 
country  is  so  deeply  rooted  in  the  stability  of 
healthy  family  life  that  we  can  cite  instances 
when  it  became  a  new  source  of  strength  for  the 
people  when  nothing  else  stood  firm  in  a  shattered 
national  life.  This  was  our  own  position  after 
the  Thirty  Years'  War.  Nothing,  except  a 
certain  intimate  character  of  family  life,  survived 
the  devastation  of  our  ancient  culture,  and  of  all 
that  made  Germany  great,  in  those  terrible  days. 
The  women  bore  their  part  in  the  general  moral 
deterioration  of  the  time,  but  in  comparison  with 
everything  else  home  life  did  remain  to  some 
extent  the  one  moral  stronghold  in  Germany, 
and  the  mothers  of  the  nation  were  its  guides 
towards  better  things. 

234 


MONOGAMY  235 

A  sympathy  which  is  perfectly  natural  will 
always  exist  between  men  of  genius  and  really 
feminine  women.  The  strong  point  of  the  truly 
womanly  character  lies  in  acuteness  of  under- 
standing, hence  it  always  happens  that  men  of 
mark  are  strongly  attracted  by  them  both  for 
good  and  evil,  and  in  intercourse  with  them 
display  their  best  and  noblest  sides. 

The  reason  why  this  subject  is  so  attractive 
and  stimulating  is  because  it  shows  us  clearly 
that,  in  spite  of  human  frailty,  our  sex  is  capable 
of  forming  an  absolute  moral  ideal  and  approxi- 
mately carrying  it  into  effect.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  the  relations  between  the  sexes  have  gradu- 
ally become  more  moral,  and  that  in  monogamy 
the  institution  of  marriage  has  found  its  highest 
form. 

A  regulated  form  of  sexual  companionship  is 
necessary  to  all  orderly  public  life.  The  old 
German  word  for  marriage  contains  a  depth  of 
meaning  which  brings  out  the  two  aspects  of 
this  relationship.  As  the  word  stands  both  for 
"  law  "  and  "  bond  "  it  betokens  both  a  legal  and 
a  moral  relationship,  and  describes  correctly 
the  double  nature  of  the  contract.  A  law  of 
inheritance  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  private 
property.  Property,  then,  presupposes  the 
Family,  which  is  thus  inseparable  from  the  most 
primitive  legal  conceptions.  A  glance  at  the 
psychology  of  nations  is  enough  to  show  how  this 
connection  is  a  moral  one  as  well.  Only  through 
marriage  can  man  attain  complete  development, 
in  the  perfect  and  ideal  sense  of  the  word.  A 
wonderful  happiness  is  found  in  lawful  com- 


236  THE  FAMILY 

panionship  between  the  sexes,  when  it  is  really 
serious  and  sacred.  Certain  essential  traits  of 
both  feminine  and  masculine  natures  only  unfold 
themselves  to  the  utmost  in  married  life.  The 
submission  and  self-sacrificing  loyalty  of  woman 
can  only  be  seen  at  its  loveliest  with  her  husband 
and  children,  and  the  generosity  of  the  man  will 
likewise  be  most  strongly  displayed  for  the  sake 
of  his  children  and  his  wife. 

Like  all  the  great  institutions  of  the  common 
life  of  man,  the  Family  was  crude  in  its  begin- 
nings, and  only  a  long  and  toilsome  development 
has  produced  that  pure  form  of  monogamy  of 
which  we  may  say  that  its  fundamental  char- 
acteristics will  endure  because  they  are  in  har- 
mony with  Nature,  although  in  some  of  its 
details  there  may  still  be  room  for  reform. 
Monogamy  must  be  the  normal  rule,  since,  as 
we  have  seen,  the  two  sexes  are  equally  divided 
in  every  State,  except  for  a  quite  unimportant 
overplus  of  women.  It  is  therefore  quite  an 
exception  when  we  find  polygamy  practised  by 
whole  nations.  It  can  never  be  otherwise  than 
as  it  is  in  the  East  to-day — the  privilege  of  the 
ruling  classes  and  the  rich,  which  the  mass  of 
the  people  must  renounce  for  material  reasons. 
It  is  only  practicable  on  a  large  scale  when  the 
ruling  class  comprises  the  whole  nation,  as  it 
did  with  the  Turks  in  their  great  days.  The 
intimate  connection  between  marriage  and  the 
collective  public  life  proves  that  slavery  is 
inseparable  from  the  harem  system.  Polygamy 
and  personal  freedom  can  never  flourish  side  by 
side. 


GROUP-MARRIAGE  237 

Thus  everything  leads  us  back  to  the  opinion 
that  monogamy  is  the  product  of  a  very  long 
development  of  civilization,  but  the  most  in 
accordance  with  Nature,  in  spite  of  all  the  hard- 
ships which  may  attend  it.  Polygamy  is  older, 
because  man  is  the  stronger,  and  only  too  prone 
to  misuse  his  strength,  and  also  because  women 
grow  old  sooner  than  the  more  vigorous  male  ; 
moreover,  there  is  no  doubt  at  all  that  man's 
natural  inclinations  are  polygamous.  He  rules, 
and  the  woman  surrenders  herself,  and  in  so  doing 
she  must  overcome  so  much  natural  bashfulness 
and  shame  that  all  the  thoughts  and  sentiments 
of  a  healthy  -  minded  woman  must  be  mono- 
gamous. We  find  that  the  polygamous  relation- 
ship prevailed  among  nations  who  were  less 
sensually  inclined  than  the  Orientals.  Our  scanty 
sources  of  knowledge  are  enough  to  assure  us 
that  our  own  earliest  forefathers  allowed  their 
leaders  several  wives.  The  Merovingians  had 
an  authorized  harem,  and  even  Charles  the  Great 
had  a  number  of  concubines,  whom  he  alludes 
to  so  openly  that  we  are  bound  to  conclude  that 
there  was  no  scandal  attaching  to  them. 

It  is  evident  from  all  this  that  the  first  begin- 
nings of  sex  relationship  must  have  been  cast 
in  the  crudest  form.  If  we  accept  the  theory  of 
descent  from  one  pair  of  human  beings,  it  becomes 
clear  that  marriage  between  brother  and  sister 
must  have  taken  place  through  a  very  long 
period  of  the  most  ancient  human  history,  and 
that  the  instinct  against  what  we  call  incest 
must  have  been  acquired  later.  Distant  indeed 
must  those  times  have  been,  since  the  physical 


238  THE  FAMILY 

repugnance  for  it  seems  now  to  be  innate  in 
every  nation.  Centuries  have  elapsed  since  this 
feeling  of  bodily  disgust  came  into  existence. 

As  far  as  we  can  see  through  the  darkness  of 
those  early  times  it  would  seem  probable  that 
group  -  marriages  were  the  custom  among  a 
portion  of  the  human  race — this  meaning  that 
one  group  of  men  lived  in  a  collective  sex  relation- 
ship with  one  group  of  women.  The  researches 
of  the  American,  Morgan,  are  perfectly  correct 
as  regards  a  great  many  races,  and  support  his 
theory  so  far  as  it  is  capable  of  proof.  The 
institution  of  matriarchy,  which  we  find  in  so 
many  barbaric  peoples,  very  often  goes  together 
with  this  form  of  marriage.  It  is  still  an  open 
question  whether  it  existed  among  the  earliest 
forefathers  of  the  German  race.  If  our  ancestors 
were  really  acquainted  with  group-marriage,  it 
is  only  fair  to  them  to  say  that  they  passed  away 
from  this  half-animal  form  of  sex  companionship 
relatively  very  early.  In  any  case,  there  is 
hardly  anything  in  our  oldest  legal  institutions 
which  could  be  construed  as  being  in  harmony 
with  the  matriarchal  system.  To  be  sure, 
Lamprecht,  in  his  German  History,  claims  to 
have  found  trace  of  it,  but  I  do  not  yet  consider 
his  assertion  to  be  established. 

A  common  dwelling-place  for  the  families 
included  is  the  concomitant  of  the  group- 
marriage,  and  with  it  we  find  a  perfectly  vague 
conception  of  the  meaning  of  property.  The 
immense  step  between  this  system  and  mono- 
gamy could  not  be  taken,  therefore,  without  a 
great  economic  revolution.  As  soon  as  possession 


POSITION  OF  WOMEN  239 

meant  something,  a  monogamous  marriage,  in 
which  paternal  took  the  place  of  maternal 
inheritance,  became  a  necessity.  Man  took  his 
perfectly  normal  position  as  the  bread-winner 
for  the  family.  Production  lay  in  his  hands, 
consumption  in  the  hands  of  the  woman. 

It  is  a  gross  error  to  suppose  that  where 
matriarchy  prevailed  woman's  position  was  equal 
to  man's.  This  piece  of  sophistry  is  encouraged 
by  the  Social  Democrats,  who  exploit  Morgan 
(as  Engels  does)  to  serve  their  own  squalid 
present  ends.  They  allege  that  women  were 
oppressed  by  men  through  monogamy,  and  that 
we  are  only  now  entering  again  upon  an  epoch 
of  liberty  for  them  in  the  freer  system  of  union 
among  the  proletariat.  These  kinds  of  sophistries 
are  in  such  glaring  contradiction  to  the  ordinary 
experience  of  life  that  it  is  astounding  that  men 
of  experience  should  let  them  pass  unchallenged. 
Is  it  likely,  under  those  primitive  conditions, 
that  the  man,  being  the  stronger,  should  volun- 
tarily renounce  the  power  which  he  thus  held 
for  purely  superstitious  reasons  ?  When  a  woman 
was  the  instrument  of  the  lust  of  several  men  at 
the  same  time  it  is  impossible  that  she  should 
have  been  treated  with  more  respect  than  under 
the  system  of  monogamy.  It  will  remain  a 
fact  that  in  barbarian  society  the  female  held 
relatively  a  very  humble  position,  because  the 
male  used  and  abused  his  strength  in  simple 
fashion,  and  because  the  respect  for  woman 
cannot  but  be  the  outcome  of  a  long  development 
in  civilization. 

Among  Aryan  peoples,  at  all  events,  group- 


240  THE  FAMILY 

marriage  belongs  to  an  infinitely  remote  past. 
There  is  not  the  slightest  trace  of  matriarchy  or 
its  effect  in  the  present  structure  of  German  law. 
A  few  years  ago  Lorenz  of  Jena  amused  himself 
by  demonstrating  that  all  the  dynasties  of  Europe 
are  descended  from  a  single  couple,  ancestors  of 
Maria  Theresa  on  the  maternal  side  ;  but  his- 
torians need  not  take  this  quaint  conceit  seriously. 
We  were  all  quite  aware  already  that  the  Austrian 
Court  is  closely  allied  with  the  other  Catholic 
reigning  houses,  and  that  all  the  Protestant 
royal  families  are  connected  in  the  same  way. 
The  fact  is  perfectly  simple,  it  throws  no  new 
light  upon  the  subject,  it  has  had  no  legal  or 
political  consequences,  and  need  not  be  taken 
into  our  consideration,  since  we  are  so  widely 
separated  from  those  ancient  institutions,  even 
if  they  did  once  actually  exist  amongst  us. 

Monogamy,  then,  is  firmly  established  among 
European  peoples,  although  the  sequence  of  its 
history  as  the  most  highly  moral  form  of  sex 
companionship  is  not  yet  scientifically  traceable. 
It  is  now  very  interesting  to  observe  how  much, 
in  spite  of  it,  the  social  and  political  position  of 
women  has  differed  in  different  countries.  The 
Orientals,  who  have  not  yet  attained  to  mono- 
gamy, have  always  been  incapable  of  even 
approximately  understanding  the  dignity  of 
woman.  Contempt  for  her  sex  is  the  necessary 
consequence  of  the  Eastern  tradition  of  the 
harem.  The  influence  of  Oriental  custom  was 
very  remarkable  in  Athens.  Athenian  women 
lived  in  harem  fashion,  their  apartments  were 
situated  in  the  inner  court  of  the  house,  so  they 


SPARTA.     ROME  241 

could  not  even  look  out  upon  the  street.  The 
only  women  who  played  any  part  in  public  life 
were  the  hetairae,  those  enticing  and  beautiful 
creatures  who  bewitched  men  by  the  brilliance 
of  their  intellect.  The  lawful  wife  lived  in  an 
Eastern  seclusion.  The  visitor  in  modern  Athens 
is  astonished  afresh  by  seeing  no  women  ;  they 
are  still  withdrawn  as  if  in  a  harem,  although 
monogamy  was  instituted  early  among  the 
Athenians.  Even  legally  the  wife  is  not  much 
more  than  the  principal  slave  of  her  husband, 
and  there  are  practically  no  instances  of  re- 
spectable women  having  played  any  role  in  the 
history  of  the  country. 

The  Spartans  afford  us  a  very  unpleasing 
contrast  in  this  respect.  The  natural  instinct 
of  mankind  has  always  been  to  separate  the 
sexes.  A  different  costume  for  men  and  women 
has  been  the  ever-recurring  protest  of  human 
civilization  against  the  insane  doctrine  of  female 
emancipation.  This  difference  in  dress  and  edu- 
cation has  always  been  the  token  of  morality 
in  human  life,  and  the  colossal  stupidity  of  the 
nineteenth  century  is  displayed  in  the  desire  to 
overthrow  this  most  ancient  practice  in  the 
name  of  progress.  This  folly  was  shared  by  the 
Spartans.  Their  women  lived  in  the  same  way 
as  the  men,  their  maidens  took  part  in  the  games 
with  the  naked  youths.  What  must  be  the 
ultimate  fate  of  these  women  who  matched 
themselves  naked  against  men  stripped  for  the 
wrestling-ground  ?  The  world  has  never  again 
seen  the  female  sex  so  brutalized.  This  sys- 
tem worked  while  the  stern  Spartan  discipline 

VOL.  I  R 


242  THE  FAMILY 

kept  both  men  and  women  in  subjection,  but 
when,  in  later  times,  the  old  tribal  foundation  of 
ownership  was  broken  through,  and  many  women 
became  possessed  of  the  ancient  tribal  property, 
their  brutal  hard  -  heartedness  finally  brought 
ruin  upon  the  State. 

Women  had  a  nobler  status  in  ancient  Rome. 
The  Roman  family  was  more  independent  in 
relation  to  the  State,  the  children  received  a 
pre-eminently  home  education,  and  therefore 
the  position  of  the  Roman  matron  was  more 
dignified  than  that  of  the  women  in  Athens  or 
Sparta.  We  sometimes  hear  of  Roman  women 
whose  nobility  of  character  enabled  them  to 
take  part  in  public  life  without  losing  any  of  their 
feminine  modesty  thereby. 

But  the  sternness  of  antiquity  was  in  the 
essence  of  the  Roman  outlook  also.  Marriage 
was  regarded  primarily  as  an  institution  for  the 
propagation  of  the  race.  Later,  under  the 
Emperors,  married  life  became  utterly  demoral- 
ized, divorce  was  obtainable  on  the  most  frivolous 
pretexts,  so  that  Seneca  could  say  that  the 
Roman  ladies  counted  the  years  of  their  lives 
by  the  number  of  their  husbands.  From  this 
resulted  the  shocking  moral  conditions  of  the 
time,  and  finally  marriage  became  nothing  more 
than  concubinage.  Another  effect  was  the 
terrible  unfruitfulness  of  marriages,  and  we  get 
the  impression  that  this  nation  required  to  be 
subjugated  by  another,  and  have  new  energy 
infused  into  its  veins. 

It  is  well  known  how  women  above  all  in- 
fluenced the  first  spread  of  Christianity.  It 


FRANCE.     ITALY  243 

was  necessary  to  reopen  the  world  of  feeling  to 
an  over-cultured  age  which  believed  that  civiliza- 
tion consisted  in  a  series  of  maxims  with  which 
everybody  should  be  stuffed. 

How  great  was  the  part  played  by  women 
even  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  new  teaching, 
and  how  important  they  came  to  be  in  the  secret 
worship  carried  on  in  the  Catacombs  !  It  was 
they  who  showed  mankind  how  to  obey  the 
injunction  to  love  their  enemies,  which  had 
called  forth  the  scorn  of  the  ancient  world. 

Without  women  it  is  impossible  to  imagine 
the  extension  of  this  religion  of  Love  throughout 
heathendom,  and  it  becomes  clear  at  once  that 
they  must  occupy  a  different  place  in  a  Christian 
dispensation  from  that  which  they  filled  in  Pagan 
times.  Here  two  influences  are  at  work :  one  the 
fine  old  woman- worship  of  the  Germans,  which 
saw  in  her  something  high  and  holy;  the  other, 
Christianity,  which  joined  to  its  mariolatry  a 
general  respect  for  all  women,  which  degenerated 
at  last  into  the  unmanly  service  of  the  Trouba- 
dours. But  side  by  side  by  this  we  find  among 
the  Germans  that  a  wardship  was  exercised  by 
the  male  sex  over  the  female,  and  that  the  men 
exacted  a  heavy  payment  for  their  protection. 

There  is  no  question,  therefore,  of  equality 
between  the  sexes  in  the  legal  sense,  and  this 
makes  the  moral  esteem  for  women  all  the  more 
remarkable.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  the 
various  ways  in  which  this  sentiment  has  been 
manifested  among  the  nations  of  civilization. 
France  stands  out  pre-eminently  as  the  country 
of  female  domination,  in  so  far  as  this  is  com- 


244  THE  FAMILY 

patible  with  Christianity.  We  can  say  of  the 
French  that  in  every  century  they  have  lived 
under  petticoat  government ;  and  we  find  the 
explanation  in  the  character  of  their  women, 
which  combines  great  energy  with  a  high  degree 
of  charm.  Frenchwomen  also  have  something 
masculine  in  their  outward  appearance,  and 
the  celebrated  French  moustache  makes  its  ap- 
pearance early  with  them.  Throughout  history 
we  may  see  this  peculiar  energetic  manly  type 
wielding  such  an  influence  in  France  that  they 
dominated  whole  periods  :  the  most  outstanding 
being  the  era  of  the  French  Revolution.  Firstly, 
there  was  Madame  de  Stael,  who  had  all  the  faults 
of  the  doctrinaire,  but  was  personally  witty 
and  worthy  of  respect ;  secondly,  we  have  Madame 
Roland,  representative  of  the  time  of  the 
Girondins,  and  exhibiting  already  something 
of  the  coarseness  of  the  women  of  the  Revolu- 
tion ;  and  then  we  find  Madame  Tallien,  the  pre- 
siding genius  of  a  third  period  which  had  sunk 
still  lower,  and  in  which  sensuality  had  gained 
an  appalling  ascendancy.  This  influence  of 
individual  women  runs  through  later  phases 
of  French  history  also,  from  Madame  Adelaide, 
sister  of  Louis  Philippe,  who  was  dubbed  "  the 
only  man  in  the  Orleans  family,"  to  the  Empress 
Eugenie,  Madame  MacMahon,  and  Madame 
Adam,  the  friend  of  Gambetta. 

When  we  compare  the  French  with  other 
Latin  races  we  find  that  although  women  have 
not  so  much  power  in  Italy,  they  are  still  in 
many  respects  on  the  same  level  as  men.  The 
ideals  of  feminine  beauty  admired  by  the  various 


WOMEN  IN  MIDDLE  AGES  245 

nations  are  very  significant  in  these  matters. 
The  ideal  of  the  Italians  is  not  the  somewhat 
sentimental  and  flower -like  loveliness  which 
northerners  prefer,  but  rather  the  virago  with 
imperious  eyes  and  the  face  and  form  of  a  Juno. 
No  one  understands  the  history  of  Italy  who 
does  not  know  what  an  important  part  was 
played  in  the  movement  of  unity  of  our  own 
day  by  such  outstanding  women  as  the  Countess 
of  San  Germano,  the  great  friend  of  Cavour. 
How  many  of  them  suffered  personally  at  the 
hands  of  the  Austrians  1  The  brave  women  of 
Brescia  were  even  flogged  in  the  public  square 
by  the  Austrian  soldiery.  Here,  too,  the  mascu- 
line element  is  apparent  in  these  women  who 
have  made  their  mark  in  Italy,  and  it  is  particu- 
larly characteristic  of  them  and  all  others  of 
Latin  race. 

When  we  now  turn  to  study  the  position  of 
women  in  the  history  of  our  own  country  we  are 
once  more  astounded  by  the  wealth  and  variety 
of  German  life.  We  can  find  no  one  fundamental 
tendency  running  through  it  all.  The  German 
spirit,  character,  and  manners  take  so  many 
forms  that  we  can  even  call  some  centuries 
masculine  and  others  feminine.  Let  us  take, 
for  instance,  the  heroic  tenth  century,  when  the 
Saxon  kings  were  at  the  zenith  of  their  power. 
Women  at  that  time  appear  to  have  had  no 
importance  whatever  ;  if  any  of  them  appear  in 
public  life  at  all  it  would  be  a  Queen-Mother 
who  had  temporarily  a  man's  work  to  perform. 
Then  follows  the  chivalrous,  polished  century 
of  the  Hohenstaufen,  the  age  of  gallantry  and 


246  THE  FAMILY 

the  Minnesingers,  quite  distinctly  feminine  in 
its  universal  attempt  to  adorn  itself  with  womanly 
graces.  Men's  very  exterior  was  typical :  beard- 
less faces,  well-kept  hands,  even  their  dress  was 
almost  feminine.  Barbarossa  received  his  nick- 
name because  he  drew  all  eyes  in  Italy  by  wearing 
his  beard  among  a  smooth-chinned  generation. 
Above  all,  there  was  the  Romance  poetry,  with 
its  exaggerated  exaltation  of  women.  There 
was  much  that  was  beautiful  in  the  culture  of 
this  twelfth  century,  but  also  a  vast  deal  that 
was  immoral ;  it  is  a  sign  of  the  widespread 
profligacy  of  feeling  that  all  the  Troubadour 
poetry  harps  upon  the  string  of  conjugal  in- 
fidelity. 

This  period,  then,  is  one  in  which  the  German 
nation  was  upon  the  whole  sympathetic  to 
feminine  influence.  The  sixteenth  century 
stands  out  in  the  sharpest  contrast  as  being 
masculine  to  the  point  of  brutality.  There  is 
a  forcible  coarseness  about  the  great  personalities 
of  that  time  ;  women  and  their  education  have 
become  of  little  account.  In  Martin  Luther's 
married  life,  which  was  the  happiest  of  the 
century,  we  see  how  Frau  Kathe  appears  like 
a  good  little  goose  by  the  side  of  her  great  hus- 
band, offering  him  her  loyal  heart,  indeed,  but 
immeasurably  inferior  to  him  in  education.  The 
Reformation  proclaims  itself  for  good  and  evil 
as  the  work  of  men,  of  men  of  clear,  conscious, 
and  acute  understanding,  men  who  could  break 
the  old  bondage  with  the  courage  of  lions,  but 
who  could  not  give  the  womanly  spirit  its  full 
value.  Protestantism  neglects  the  feminine 


ENGLISH  FAMILY  LIFE  247 

temperament  too  much  in  its  austere  forms  and 
its  closed  churches,  for  to  many  women's  natures 
the  open  haven  for  quiet  religious  recollection 
is  absolutely  indispensable. 

All  this  side  of  ecclesiastical  life,  and  beauty 
of  worship  more  than  all,  has  been  very  markedly 
neglected.  The  narrow  masculine  character  of 
the  Reformation  continues  to  the  present  day. 
We  trace  it  very  clearly  in  the  Prussian  State, 
which  is  Protestant  to  its  core.  No  State  has 
ever  been  less  dominated  by  women  ;  nor  has 
it  ever  been  ruled  by  them  since  the  days  of  the 
Great  Elector.  Here  the  influence  of  the  six- 
teenth century  is  still  at  work,  impressing  its 
essential  character  upon  the  world  of  Protestant 
Germany. 

The  eighteenth  century,  on  the  contrary,  was 
here,  as  elsewhere,  eminently  feminine  in  its 
elegance  and  fertility  of  , talent.  Men  have 
probably  never  looked  more  womanish  than  in 
the  days  when  they  all  wore  lace  and  shaved 
themselves  clean.  The  female  sex  produced  the 
"beautiful  souls,"  so-called,  who  carried  the 
intellectual  side  of  social  life  to  a  fine  point, 
and  side  by  side  with  them  we  find  the  richly 
gifted  women  of  the  classical  epoch  of  our  own 
literature.  Caroline  Schelling  was  hardly  the 
model  for  a  virtuous  woman,  but  what  a  brilliant 
and  subtly  sympathetic  creature  she  was  !  Her 
letters  are  a  marvel,  not  a  whit  less  beautiful 
than  the  letters  of  Goethe's  mother. 

In  the  nineteenth  century  we  have  reverted 
to  rougher,  more  masculine  methods.  The  atti- 
tude of  our  time  towards  women  is  chivalrous 


248  THE  FAMILY 

in  theory,  clownish  in  practice.  Owing  to  the 
unnatural  lateness  of  marriages,  prostitution 
has  become  so  common,  and  displays  itself  so 
impudently,  that  the  whole  tone  of  society  has 
been  demoralized  by  it.  In  addition  we  have 
the  calamitous  idea  of  female  emancipation. 
Women  are  mistaken  when  they  suppose  that 
they  can  influence  men  by  masculine  methods, 
or  subdue  us  by  glaring  ferociously  at  us  ;  the 
result  of  these  efforts  is  visible  in  the  bad  manners 
of  the  present  day.  Politeness  to  a  pretty  girl 
is  not  a  merit,  but  a  natural  instinct ;  real  good 
breeding  is  shown  in  civility  to  an  old  lady. 
Judge  the  behaviour  in  any  omnibus  by  this 
standard,  and  observe  how  men  behave  towards 
the  elderly  women  ! 

In  England  family  life  has  always  been  on 
a  very  sound  footing.  The  Englishman  shows 
his  respect  for  women  in  his  observance  of  the 
outward  forms  of  courtesy,  and  her  position  in 
society  is  one  of  liberty  without  licence.  By 
virtue  of  established  custom  rather  than  legal 
compulsion  the  system  of  inheritance  in  the 
upper  classes  settles  property  almost  exclusively 
upon  the  eldest  son.  Consequently  there  are 
not  many  rich  heiresses  in  the  English  aristocracy, 
and  most  marriages  are  really  love  matches ; 
these  are  a  benefit  both  to  society  and  to  the 
State  since  they  produce  the  best  children  morally 
as  well  as  physically.  These  relatively  sound 
conditions  have  only  been  interfered  with  latterly, 
by  the  blue-stocking  element,  and  the  movement 
for  emancipation. 

Among  the  youthful  nation  of  North  America 


FEMALE  LABOUR  249 

chivalry  towards  women  is  almost  the  only 
common  bond  which  unites  the  incongruous 
elements  of  society.  The  Americans  are  justly 
proud  of  their  boast  that  a  young  girl  can  travel 
from  New  York  to  San  Francisco  without  having 
to  fear  the  slightest  discourtesy  on  the  part  of 
any  man. 

Many  and  various,  then,  have  been  the 
positions  held  by  women  in  the  State  and  in 
society  at  different  times  and  among  different 
nations.  We  are  led  to  a  closer  discussion  of 
the  place  they  hold  by  those  efforts  for  the 
emancipation  of  their  sex  which  we  have  alluded 
to  already,  and  which  are  once  more  being 
advanced  everywhere  with  so  much  arrogance 
and  assurance.  Our  self-complacent  century  is 
not  only  suffering  from  the  disease  of  a  Radical- 
ism so  prosaic  that  it  holds  in  horror  the  manifold 
variations  which  Nature  and  history  have  im- 
planted in  human  life,  but  still  more  from  the 
moral  cowardice  of  the  men  of  culture  and 
intellect,  who  dare  not  denounce  the  hollowness 
of  these  theories  though  they  inwardly  recognize 
it,  because  no  one  is  willing  nowadays  to  be 
called  reactionary,  and  the  greatest  follies  of 
our  century  flaunt  as  principles  of  Equality  and 
Liberty.  This  applies  particularly  to  the 
woman's  question.  The  doctrine  of  female 
emancipation  has  always  come  up  in  the  periods 
of  history  when  the  bonds  of  chastity  and  morality 
were  slackened.  We  find  it  in  the  last  days  of 
Ancient  Greece  and  in  the  decadence  of  Rome, 
usually  more  intelligently  expressed  than  it  is 
at  present.  There  is  nothing  new  about  it, 


250  THE  FAMILY 

except  the  fact  that  it  is  presented  to  us  to-day 
in  the  guise  of  social-political  wisdom,  and  the 
average  person  is  quite  weaponless  against  the 
phrase  "  social  political." 

This  modern  doctrine  is  intimately  connected 
with  existing  and  undeniable  abuses.  We  have 
seen  that  in  all  civilized  nations  women  are  in  a 
majority  ;  to  this  we  must  add  the  increased 
difficulty  of  founding  a  family  in  the  upper 
classes,  and  we  understand  why  the  number  of 
unmarried  women  has  become  unnaturally  large, 
and  that  professions  must  be  found  by  which  they 
can  be  supported  in  respectability.  It  is  an 
old  law  that  the  more  skilled  kinds  of  feminine 
manual  labour  must  always  be  underpaid.  The 
large  amount  of  work  done,  as  a  means  of  adding 
to  their  income,  by  wives,  and  daughters  living 
at  home,  tends  to  depress  the  price  of  labour  for 
professional  women  who  have  to  live  upon  what 
they  earn.  These  are  placed  in  a  desperate 
position  by  their  inability  to  gain  enough  to 
support  themselves  decently.  The  modern 
growth  of  wholesale  industry  has  placed  an 
insuperable  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  old- 
fashioned  forms  of  female  labour.  It  has  also 
had  a  disastrous  effect  upon  home  life.  The 
industrial  unemployment  of  the  modern  woman 
is  largely  due  to  the  new  conditions  of  produc- 
tion, for  what  good  purpose  can  now  be  served 
by  feminine  hand  labour  ? 

It  has  become  a  necessity  to  provide  new 
careers  for  women.  Social  legislation  has  no 
more  sacred  duty  to  perform,  for  the  misery 
among  women  workers  has  risen  to  a  terrible 


PROFESSIONS  FOR  WOMEN        251 

pitch  ;  but  it  must  not  be  undertaken  without 
due  consideration  of  the  different  capacities  of 
men  and  women.  It  is  a  total  misunderstanding 
of  Nature  to  look  upon  women  as  inferior  beings, 
as  Aristotle  and  many  others  do.  They  are 
men's  superiors  in  many  ways  ;  no  man  has  such 
a  force  of  affection  to  draw  upon  as  the  love  of 
a  mother  for  her  children.  It  is  evident,  however, 
that  the  natural  methods  of  thought  are  different 
in  the  two  sexes.  Men  are  guided  by  reason, 
women  by  feeling.  Man  is  logical  to  an  extent 
which  makes  it  safe  to  assert  that  when  he  is 
totally  lacking  in  intelligence  he  is  also  lacking  in 
receptivity.  If  he  is  really  stupid  he  will  not  be 
quick  to  receive  impressions.  With  the  woman 
the  contrary  is  the  case,  for  her  conception  of 
life  is  formed  by  feeling.  We  all  know  women 
whose  intellectual  endowment  can  hardly  be 
called  even  average,  who  yet  diffuse  happiness 
through  their  whole  circle  by  the  power  of  their 
deep  and  unwavering  feeling. 

These  innate  differences  must  bring  about  a 
great  difference  in  the  methods  of  male  and 
female  education ;  a  difference  whose  grounds 
are  both  physical  and  psychical.  It  is  a  disgrace- 
ful moral  weakness  when  so  many  sensible  men 
back  up  the  newspaper  outcry  for  the  invasion 
of  our  Universities  by  women.  The  whole  char- 
acter of  those  institutions  would  be  falsified  by 
such  an  error  of  judgment.  It  is  unfortunate 
that  Hermann  Grimm  should  have  been  one  of 
its  advocates.  The  Universities  are  more  than 
seats  of  learning,  pure  and  simple  :  they  offer 
(and  this  applies  particularly  to  the  smaller  ones) 


252  THE  FAMILY 

a  form  of  comradeship,  which,  in  the  liberty  of 
its  intercourse,  is  of  inestimable  value  in  the 
education  of  a  young  man's  character.  How 
is  it  possible  to  have  two  classes  of  students, 
the  one  possessing  this  academic  freedom,  and 
the  other  deprived  of  it,  for  it  could  not  be 
safely  granted  to  women  ?  Shall  the  phrases  of 
journalism  have  the  power  to  corrupt  the  noble 
institutions  of  our  Universities,  and  withhold 
their  liberty  from  our  youth  ?  The  folly  of  such 
counsels  is  only  too  obvious. 

When  we  come  to  enquire  what  are  the  pro- 
fessions which  can  be  made  accessible  to  women 
we  find  that  they  are  unfortunately  all  too  few. 
First  and  foremost,  all  governmental  functions 
must  be  excluded.  It  is  self-evident  that  all 
these  belong  to  the  manly  sphere.  No  masculine 
attribute  is  so  foreign  to  women  as  the  legal 
sense. 

Nearly  every  woman  has  to  learn  from  men 
the  meaning  of  law ;  before  she  can  grasp  it  she 
has  to  be  trained  to  see  the  world  as  men  see  it. 
In  the  life  of  the  State,  personality  must  be 
handled  by  the  light  of  reason,  and  without  bias, 
which  are  manly  attributes  both,  to  which  it 
would  scarcely  ever  be  possible  for  women  to 
attain,  since  their  greater  measure  of  sentiment 
leads  them  involuntarily  to  an  immediate  parti  zan- 
ship.  Lastly,  we  come  to  that  purely  physical 
part  of  government,  which  must  be  backed  by 
armed  men.  Now  armed  men  do  not  like  taking 
their  orders  from  a  woman.  Therefore  women 
cannot  fill  posts  of  genuine  authority. 

Experiments    have    been    made    lately    with 


QUEENS  253 

female  suffrage  in  Canada,  which  can  only  be 
described  as  frivolities  which  would  not  have 
been  ventured  upon  if  people  had  not  described 
them  to  themselves  as  mere  shams  to  curry 
favour  with  the  masses.  The  granting  of  this 
right  to  women  can  only  lead  to  one  of  two  results. 
Either  the  wife,  and  possibly  the  daughter  also, 
vote  the  same  way  as  the  husband  and  father, 
and  thereby  give  married  men  an  unjust  pre- 
ponderance, or  else  they  vote  against  him,  and 
drag  the  discord  of  public  life  frivolously  into  the 
peace  of  home,  which  should  be  essentially  the 
refuge  from  the  turmoil  of  politics. 

There  is  one  exception  to  the  rule  that  women 
are  naturally  unfit  to  hold  office  of  authority, 
which  is  rather  disconcerting  to  the  superficial 
thinker.  The  very  highest  of  all ,  political  posi- 
tions can  sometimes  be  very  successfully  occupied 
by  a  woman.  We  must  be  careful  not  to  be 
misled  about  this  by  mere  phrases.  In  the  roll 
of  reigning  women  throughout  history  we  find 
a  remarkably  large  number  of  outstanding  names. 
Margaret  of  Denmark,  the  foundress  of  the  Union 
of  Calmar,  Elizabeth  of  England,  Maria  Theresa, 
Catherine  II.,  Amelia,  the  great  Regent  of 
Hesse-Cassel  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War,  Caroline 
of  Darmstadt,  the  great  Landgravine,  Pauline 
of  Lippe-Detmold, — this  is  a  relatively  long  list 
of  famous  women,  among  the  rulers  of  history, 
and  the  shallow  mind  jumps  to  its  conclusion  at 
once.  But,  first  of  all,  the  position  of  a  reigning 
Princess  is  an  exceptional  one  ;  the  female  ruler 
is  not  disturbed  by  the  direct  assaults  of  brutality 
and  malice.  Secondly,  we  must  ask  ourselves 


254  THE  FAMILY 

whether  these  women  were  on  the  level  of  the 
average.  Certainly  Elizabeth  and  Maria  Theresa 
stood  so  far  above  it  that,  like  Catherine,  they 
reached  the  point  of  genius. 

No  more,  then,  can  be  safely  asserted  than 
that,  among  the  few  women  who  have  reigned, 
a  relatively  large  number  have  been  remarkable. 
If  we  want  to  make  a  general  rule,  we  must  look 
at  the  average,  and  there  we  find  such  reigns  as 
Anne's  in  England  or  Elizabeth  of  Russia.  From 
them  we  realize  that  our  German  forefathers 
showed  sound  sense  when  they  excluded  women 
from  the  throne.  The  apparent  exceptions  only 
prove  the  rule.  Queen  Victoria  of  England  is 
one  of  them.  Here  we  are  confronted  with  that 
peculiar  shadowy  institution  to  which  Parliament 
has  reduced  the  English  monarchy.  Its  duty  is 
to  stand,  with  appearance  of  outward  dignity, 
in  the  midst  of  parties,  not  above  them.  We 
find,  upon  closer  inspection,  that  a  wisely  coun- 
selled woman  fills  the  part  of  a  puppet  of  Parlia- 
ment better  than  a  man  does.-  A  shadow  king 
must  always  pose  as  if  he  had  done  himself  what 
has  been  done  for  him,  while  the  customary 
politeness  concedes  the  credit  unquestioningly 
to  a  lady. 

There  is,  finally,  an  objection  of  greater 
political  importance  against  female  succession  : 
it  greatly  increases  the  possibility  of  a  change 
of  dynasty.  Institutions  framed  to  prevent 
this  as  far  as  possible  are  innately  reasonable, 
and  therefore  the  foundations  of  the  exclusion 
of  women  from  the  inheritance  of  the  crown  are 
grounded  in  the  nature  of  the  State. 


WOMEN  AS  ARTISTS  255 

Therefore  the  justification  for  the  Salic  Law, 
so  called,  is  in  no  wise  removed  by  the  accident 
of  so  many  uncommon  women  having  occupied 
thrones,  and  still  less  does  this  furnish  any 
proof  of  their  having  a  vocation  for  the  service 
of  the  State.  Let  us  imagine  a  female  Minister 
of  the  Crown,  exposed  to  the  rudest  attacks  of 
Parliament.  The  Germans,  above  all  other 
nations,  would  pay  no  respect  at  all  to  a  woman 
official,  and  yet  it  must  be  paid  to  a  sheriff  or 
magistrate.  We  must  guard  against  the  well- 
known  fallacy  of  Stuart  Mill.  He  had  a  most 
shocking  blue-stocking  for  a  wife,  with  whom  I 
could  not  have  lived  for  so  much  as  a  week. 
She  imposed  upon  the  good-natured  man  until 
he  came  to  believe  that  women  have  rights  equal 
to  men.  Then  he  put  forward  the  celebrated 
argument,  Why  should  not  women  be  Ministers 
of  Finance,  since  they  have  more  economic 
instinct  than  men  ?  To  answer  this  question 
we  need  only  reverse  it  and  ask  whether  our 
great  Finance  Ministers  are  marked  out  to  be 
housewives  ?  The  greater  can  no  more  be 
deduced  from  the  less  than  the  less  from  the 
greater.  The  rule  then  will  stand — Exclusion  of 
women  from  peculiarly  governmental  functions. 

There  are  still  other  callings  which  give  scope 
for  the  really  creative  faculties  in  man,  where 
female  efficiency  is  comparatively  limited.  In 
all  the  lesser  arts  the  prettiness  and  elegance  of 
women's  work  will  keep  its  place,  but  in  pro- 
duction on  the  large  scale  the  superiority  of  men 
will  always  show  itself  afresh.  No  profession 
in  the  world  would  seem  to  be  more  adapted  to 


256  THE  FAMILY 

the  female  sex  than  that  of  a  cook,  but,  I  put  it 
to  you,  what  are  the  actual  facts  ?  The  real 
virtuosos  of  the  kitchen,  whose  names  have 
come  down  to  us  from  the  days  of  the  Egyptian 
kings  to  the  time  of  the  nineteenth  -  century 
gourmets,  have  always  been  men.  Thus  even  in 
this  feminine  art  there  seems  to  be  an  organizing 
talent  on  the  large  scale,  which  is  more  suited 
to  men.  It  is  the  same  with  the  fabrication  of 
women's  garments,  and  of  shoes  :  the  best  quality 
of  work  is  here  also  produced  by  men. 

The  question  of  the  extension  of  professions 
for  women  is  therefore  not  so  simple  as  it  seems 
to  the  enthusiasts  for  sex-equality.  Even  female 
authorship  has  upon  the  whole  had  only  a  baneful 
influence.  Here  we  must  have  the  courage  to 
speak  plainly  :  the  world  would  be  no  whit  the 
poorer  if  the  whole  blue-stocking  literature  were 
to  disappear  at  once.  No  woman  has  the  real 
creative  power  which  will  enable  her  to  produce 
a  true  work  of  Art.  Exceptions  are  marvellously 
rare,  and  it  is  in  the  nature  of  things  that  this 
should  be  so.  We  must  stick  to  the  simple 
actualities  of  life.  It  is  in  the  nature  of  men  to 
beget,  of  women  to  receive.  No  man  was  ever 
a  greater  friend  of  women  than  old  Goethe,  he 
understood  them  through  and  through,  and  yet 
how  he  ridiculed  their  morbid  desire  to  emulate 
men  in  their  actions.  Their  strength  lies  in 
sympathy  and  understanding  of  the  work  men  do. 

In  literature  also,  the  attractive,  really  feminine 
natures  are  the  ones  who  genuinely  have  this 
power  of  understanding.  Thus  Bettina  von 
Arnim  will  always  appear  as  a  fascinating 


FEMALE   EDUCATION  257 

personality.  In  her  Correspondence  between 
Goethe  and  a  Child *  the  interest  lies  precisely  in 
her  ability  to  follow  a  great  man  in  all  the  depths 
of  his  intellectual  life.  Again,  a  book  of  Christian 
Charity  which  she  dedicated  to  Frederick  William 
IV.  is  a  piece  of  genuine  feminine  creation  in 
literature.  But  in  the  world  of  Art,  as  in  science, 
there  are  problems  which  the  female  brain 
cannot  compass.  No  woman  will  ever  quite 
understand  Milton.  They  will  always  practise 
authorship,  but  most  of  it  will  be  bad.  Every 
one  of  them  who  writes  one  serious  book  would 
do  much  better,  from  the  material  point  of 
view,  by  writing  four  bad  novels.  The  world  of 
women  can  employ  its  energies  further  in  this 
field  without  being  of  any  use  to  society. 

So  we  find  at  every  turn  that  the  number  of 
masculine  professions  suitable  for  women  is  not 
very  many  ;  the  most  accessible  of  them  seems 
to  be  that  of  the  doctor.  If  there  is  to  be  any 
serious  advance  in  this  direction  the  State  must 
build  a  small  medical  school  for  women  in  some 
respectable  little  town.  When  this  has  been 
tried  and  proved  successful,  a  philosophical 
faculty  for  female  professors  could  be  added. 
In  the  country  districts  women  doctors,  with  the 
exception  of  hypnotic  healers,  are  not  possible  ; 
they  would  confine  themselves  to  the  large 
towns,  and  there  would  never  be  more  than  a 
very  few  of  them.  It  is  much  to  be  deplored 
that  the  Victoria-Lyceum,  here  in  Berlin,  has 
met  with  so  little  success.  The  idea  of  bringing 
something  of  the  higher  sciences  within  reach  of 

1  " Briefwechsel  Goethes  mil  einem  Kind" 
VOL.  I  S 


258  THE  FAMILY 

women  studying  by  themselves  was  thoroughly 
good.  The  stumbling-block  was  that  the  really 
first-rate  teachers  could  not  endure  the  Lyceum 
for  long.  They  were  generally  captured  by  a 
couple  of  attractive  ladies,  and  had  had  enough 
of  it  by  the  end  of  two  terms.  Therefore  the 
setting  up  of  a  University  for  women  will  be 
both  difficult  and  expensive,  but  it  must  be 
attempted.  In  any  case  the  best  institutes  for 
men's  education  would  disdain  to  be  used  for 
such  an  experiment.  It  would  be  an  insult  to 
their  students  to  expect  them  to  sit  side  by  side 
with  persons  who  do  not  enjoy  the  liberty  of  their 
University.  We  see  once  more  how  things  are 
advocated  in  the  name  of  freedom  which  bring 
the  destruction  of  that  very  freedom  as  their 
ultimate  result. 

The  proper  sphere  of  women  will  always 
continue  to  be  marriage  and  the  home.  They 
should  bear  children  and  rear  them  up ;  they 
should  pour  forth  within  their  family  the  pure 
fountains  of  their  loving,  sympathizing  souls, 
instilling  morality  and  modesty,  the  fear  of 
God,  and  the  mirth  and  joy  of  life.  Only  thus 
can  women  be  bringers  of  blessing,  but  assuredly 
they  cannot  be  so  in  marriage  in  the  standardized 
State  of  the  Social  Democratic  future,  which 
would  appoint  the  same  activities  for  man  and 
woman,  even  as  they  sometimes  pursue  the  same 
employment  in  factories  at  the  present  day. 
The  fact  of  their  doing  so  has  placed  women  on 
an  apparently  equal  footing  with  men  ;  it  has 
also  led  automatically  to  the  loosening  of  the  ties 
of  love  and  chastity  in  the  home,  and  has  turned 


MARRIAGE  259 

marriage  into  a  concubinage.  The  only  result 
would  be  a  violent  and  unnatural  equalization 
of  rights,  because  with  most  men  the  firmness  of 
the  family  bond  was  kept  by  its  being  the  function 
of  the  husband  to  provide  the  wherewithal, 
while  the  wife  took  charge  of  the  bringing  up, 
and  the  order  of  the  home,  only  helping  incident- 
ally to  increase  the  income.  Any  person  who 
has  the  welfare  of  the  lower  classes  at  heart  will 
come  to  the  opposite  conclusion,  and  perceive 
that  it  is  the  task  of  social  reformers  to  see  to 
it  that  women  should  no  longer  be  employed  in 
factories  at  all. 

It  must  be  arranged  that  the  wages  of  the 
male  factory-hand  shall  suffice  by  themselves  for 
the  support  of  his  family  ;  but  it  leads  to  the 
absolute  destruction  of  married  life  if  the  wife 
works  there  also,  and,  through  her  absence,  the 
meal-times  and  all  the  comforts  of  home  fall  into 
neglect. 

We  can  trace,  through  the  development  of 
legislation  for  the  family,  the  sharp  division 
which  has  come  to  pass  in  the  course  of  history 
between  private  and  public  right.  Under  certain 
primitive  conditions  of  the  tribal  State,  member- 
ship of  a  clan  was  the  preliminary  for  membership 
of  the  State.  Women,  who  were  unable  to  fight, 
and  stood  in  need  of  protection,  were  placed 
under  the  tribal  guardianship  of  their  sept  and 
were  deprived  of  legal  personality.  A  purely 
public  civil  law  was  gradually  evolved,  while 
on  the  other  hand  the  family  drew  more  and 
more  closely  into  itself,  until  at  length  in  the 
legal  sense  it  only  embraced  the  parents  and 


260  THE  FAMILY 

children,  considering  wider  relationships  for  pur- 
poses of  inheritance  alone. 

This  led  automatically  to  the  necessity  of  a 
definition  by  the  State  of  what  sex  relationship 
should  be  legally  regarded  as  a  marriage,  and 
what  should  be  the  conditions  under  which  it 
might  be  contracted,  and  possibly  dissolved  also. 
When  we  consider  what  the  process  of  develop- 
ment has  been  for  this  legislation  of  marriage  we 
find  that  we  have  entered  a  sphere  in  which  the 
natural  tendency  towards  legal  equality  works 
with  irresistible  force.  The  emotion  most  com- 
mon to  all  humanity  is  love,  and  the  delight 
in  home  and  family  ;  natural  sentiment  would 
quickly  be  fretted  by  restraint  in  this  direction, 
and  the  desire  to  raise  all  members  of  the  family 
to  an  equal  footing  is  early  aroused.  Neverthe- 
less we  must  not  trust  the  commonplace  of 
philology,  which  asserts  that  the  nations  of 
antiquity  were  far  in  advance  of  ourselves  in 
this  matter.  It  overlooks  the  essential  point, 
which  is  that  the  ancient  State  rested  upon  the 
broad  foundation  of  slavery,  and  that  it  is 
impossible  to  talk  of  equality  in  connection  with 
the  great  mass  of  the  population.  Modern 
peoples,  with  whom  the  institution  of  slavery 
assumed  a  milder  and  less  extensive  form,  clung 
to  it  the  longer  because  it  was  a  means  of  over- 
coming the  difficulties  arising  from  unequal 
marriages.  Nevertheless  the  current  of  opinion 
which  sets  against  this  conception  is  a  just  one, 
for  we  are  dealing  here  with  a  possession  common 
to  all  mankind,  where  we  are,  in  fact,  all  on  an 
equal  footing. 


LUTHER'S  HOME  LIFE  261 

We  must,  however,  remember  that  the  bond 
of  marriage  is  not  only  a  legal  but  also  a  moral 
tie  ;  hence  the  State  has  indeed  at  all  times  had 
power  to  sanction  it,  but  it  has  also  always  been 
bound  up  with  the  ordinances  of  religion.  In 
pagan  nations,  where  the  Church  had  not  yet 
developed  an  independent  position,  the  contrast 
naturally  did  not  arise,  but  it  was  bound  to 
present  itself  in  the  Christian  world  when  the 
Church  began  to  go  its  own  way,  and  became 
independent  enough  to  presume  to  act  as  monitor 
of  the  State.  It  is  easy  to  understand  how, 
when  it  took  over  from  the  infant  State  the 
great  duties  of  public  life  —  education  of  the 
young  and  care  of  the  poor, — it  should  also 
seize  upon  the  marriage  law.  To  be  sure,  the 
secular  marriage  in  presence  of  witnesses  and 
relations  maintained  its  position  for  a  long  time 
side  by  side  with  the  religious  rite.  In  the  town 
of  Stade,  and  many  others,  we  still  find  as  an 
annexe  to  the  Church  the  "  Brauthalle,"  where 
the  civil  marriage  took  place  before  the  betrothed 
couple  entered  the  sacred  building. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  in  the  canonical 
marriage  law  we  have  one  of  the  weakest  creations 
of  the  Christian  Church.  The  eternal  truths  of 
our  religion  were  extremely  ill  interpreted  by 
the  Catholic  Church  of  the  Middle  Ages.  On 
the  one  hand,  the  sacredness  of  marriage  was 
exaggerated  and  it  was  raised  into  a  sacrament, 
which  is  contrary  to  Bible  teaching  as  well  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  thing  itself.  On  the  other, 
it  was  just  as  iniquitously  underrated  through 
the  influence  of  the  Christian  asceticism,  which 


262  THE  FAMILY 

was  evolved  with  the  growth  of  monasteries  and 
cloisters.  Here  celibacy  was  represented  as  more 
holy,  and  more  pleasing  to  God,  whereas  a  know- 
ledge of  history  and  a  manly  outlook  upon  life 
prove  that  human  morality  can  only  be  fully 
developed  in  the  married  state.  To  consider  it 
as  relatively  impure  is  therefore  a  mutilation  of 
nature. 

The  conception  of  the  home  which  prevails 
in  canon  law  is  both  crude  and  unmoral,  and  the 
Reformation  rendered  one  of  its  great  services 
when  it  demonstrated  this.  Its  task  was  to  raise 
the  standard  of  secular  life,  and  to  show  how 
Christian  morality  can,  and  does,  thrive  amidst 
earthly  joys.  We  will  declare  with  pride  that 
the  most  beautiful  and  reasonable  marriage 
which  Germany  has  seen  for  long,  the  marriage 
which  has  served  as  a  pattern  of  morality  for 
millions  of  Protestants  and  German  Catholics, 
was  between  a  monk  and  a  runaway  nun.  What 
a  powerful  influence  the  character  of  Luther's 
home  life  has  been  for  the  whole  German  nation  ! 
In  that  house  the  Christmas-tree  found  its 
proper  beginnings ;  and  even  as  the  Christmas 
feast  is  the  highest  of  all  the  year  for  a  German 
family,  we  can  measure  what  Luther's  model 
and  his  table  talk,  with  all  its  depth  and  sym- 
pathetic insight,  has  done  for  the  civilization  of 
our  nation. 

So  long  as  there  was  only  one  Church  within 
the  Christian  State,  so  long  could  the  State 
permit  the  canonical  marriage  law  to  replace 
the  secular,  because  it  looked  upon  the  former 
as  its  own.  But  it  is  quite  clear  that  this  con- 


HUGUENOT   MARRIAGES  263 

dition  of  things  was  radically  altered  from  the 
moment  when  several  forms  of  faith  began  to 
exist  side  by  side.  Since  the  different  religions 
have  at  all  times  had  different  marriage  laws, 
the  State  must  lay  down  its  own  rules  for  what  is 
politically  to  be  regarded  as  a  marriage  and  what 
is  not.  It  can  only  recognize  one  law  in  this 
matter.  Only  very  few  people  can  realize  the 
enormities  which  would  follow  upon  the  admis- 
sion of  various  legal  standards  of  marriage. 
By  virtue  of  its  superiority  and  impartiality  the 
State  must  step  in  to  determine  the  conditions 
under  which  sex  companionship  is  to  be  regarded 
as  wedlock,  nor  need  it  consider  the  Church  in 
making  its  decision.  Imagine  the  consequences 
if  divorce  were  recognized  by  one  faith  and  not 
by  another,  and  think  of  what  would  happen 
to  divorced  persons  when  they  re-married.  No 
course  is  open  to  the  State  except  the  resolute 
separation  of  the  secular  from  the  ecclesiastical, 
so  that  it  alone  decrees  what  marriage  is,  while 
leaving  it  to  the  choice  of  the  bridal  pair  whether 
the  religious  ceremony  shall  be  solemnized  or  not. 
It  is  in  the  same  State  of  the  Netherlands, 
which  opened  its  ports  to  the  fugitives  from 
every  country,  and  where  we  first  find  the 
different  religious  beliefs  flourishing  on  the  same 
soil,  that  we  also  get  our  first  example  of  a  civil 
marriage.  The  system  was  introduced  into  all 
States  of  the  Republic  in  the  year  1656.  The 
State  declared  that  the  right  to  celebrate  mar- 
riages was  reserved  to  the  civil  magistrate  ;  this 
right  was,  however,  surrendered  to  the  clergy 
of  the  Calvinist  State  Church  for  marriages  of 


264  THE  FAMILY 

its  own  members ;  otherwise  it  was  preserved 
intact.  Here  civil  marriage  has  not  yet  thrown 
off  all  disguise. 

The  conditions  in  France  were  different,  and 
more  serious.  At  the  blood-stained  nuptials  of 
Henry  of  Navarre  with  the  Valois  Princess  the 
bridegroom  alone  went  into  the  church,  while 
the  Huguenot  nobility  remained  standing  with- 
out ;  so  sharp  had  the  cleavage  between  the 
two  faiths  become.  By  the  Edict  of  Nantes  the 
Huguenots  extorted  the  right  to  have  their 
marriages  performed  by  their  own  clergy  ;  but 
when  this  Edict  was  revoked  the  decree  went 
forth  from  the  State  at  the  same  time,  that  no 
marriage  was  valid  unless  performed  by  a  priest 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  Huguenots  took 
refuge  in  having  theirs  solemnized  by  the  ministers 
of  their  own  religion  in  some  secret  resort  under 
the  open  sky.  In  the  partial  reforms  carried 
out  before  the  Revolution  of  1787  it  was,  however, 
ordained  that  Huguenot  marriages  might  be 
contracted  before  a  notary.  This  is  the  begin- 
ning of  the  modern  civil  marriage,  and  it  was 
fostered  later  by  the  Jacobins'  frenzied  hatred 
of  all  religion. 

Thus  the  French  Revolution  simply  created 
a  tabula  rasa.  It  was  then  laid  down  that 
marriages  should  be  performed  by  the  civil 
magistrates,  and  it  was  left  to  the  discretion  of 
the  Church  to  give  or  to  withhold  its  sanction. 
Undoubtedly  this  was  logical,  but  logic  is  not 
the  highest  law  in  the  life  of  the  State.  Had  it 
chosen,  the  State  could  have  done  as  the  Nether- 
lands did,  and  permitted  the  clergy  of  recognized 


DIVORCE  265 

denominations  to  continue  to  charge  themselves 
with  the  celebration  of  marriages  under  certain 
denned  legal  conditions.  This  would  have  been 
the  milder  and  more  considerate  method  of 
sparing  the  feelings  of  the  masses.  The  French, 
however,  proceeded  more  drastically,  after  their 
own  logical  fashion,  and  we  have  unfortunately 
lately  followed  in  their  footsteps,  although  we 
too  have  districts  in  which  the  population  is  so 
much  of  one  strain  that  mixed  marriages  are  a 
rarity.  Such  districts  are,  to  be  sure,  becoming 
fewer,  but  they  still  exist  in  Schleswig-Holstein, 
Pomerania,  etc.  The  religious  feeling  in  these 
places  would  look  upon  it  as  an  act  of  oppression 
if  the  State  were  to  arrogate  to  itself  the  practical 
performance  of  the  marriage  ceremony,  when  it 
might  delegate  it  to  the  clergy,  and  reserve  its 
intervention  for  cases  of  dispute  between  State 
and  Church.  Such  conflict  seldom  arises,  except  in 
the  case  of  mixed  marriages,  when  it  is  frequent. 
Therefore  in  countries  where  the  population  is 
unmixed  the  optional  civil  marriage  is  the  most 
tolerable,  especially  considering  the  hideous  and 
frivolous  form  of  the  ceremony.  It  was  over-hasty 
to  make  it  obligatory  when  there  was  no  pressing 
necessity  and  when  it  could  have  been  kept 
optional  only.  Much  religious  feeling  has  been 
wounded  for  the  sake  of  logic. 

Another  reason  why  the  State  must  reserve  to 
itself  power  over  the  marriage  law  is  to  give  it 
the  right  to  decide  whether  adequate  grounds  for 
divorce  are  or  are  not  forthcoming.  It  has 
to  reckon  with  human  frailty,  for  it  is  self- 
evident  that  when  the  contract  is  entered  into, 


266  THE  FAMILY 

conditions  cannot  be  imposed  beforehand.  The 
State  must  recognize  the  principle  of  the  indis- 
solubility  of  wedlock,  for  a  marriage  which  is 
preceded  by  a  recital  of  the  circumstances  under 
which  its  bonds  may  be  artificially  loosed  is  no 
marriage  at  all,  only  a  concubinage.  It  is  there- 
fore better  that  individuals  should  suffer  under 
the  consequences  of  its  irrevocableness  than  that 
the  whole  moral  fabric  of  marriage  should  be 
desecrated.  Prussian  law  has  admitted  some 
quite  unworthy  principles  upon  this  important 
question,  and  even  allows  mutual  aversion  as  a 
ground  for  divorce ;  this  has  been  rightly  re- 
sisted by  the  Churches  of  every  denomination. 
Savigny's  draft  of  a  law  of  divorce  shows  a 
deeper  understanding,  but  unfortunately  it  never 
came  into  force. 

Canon  law  recognizes  nothing  but  physical 
unfaithfulness  as  a  ground  for  divorce,  by  which 
is  meant  separation  from  board  and  bed ;  it 
forbids  either  of  the  so  separated  persons  to 
marry  again  during  the  lifetime  of  the  other. 
This  is  a  crudely  sensual  conception  of  marriage. 
There  are  other  moral  offences,  cases  of  inward 
unfaithfulness,  which  may  divide  fine  -  feeling 
natures  far  more  widely  than  if  the  body  alone 
were  concerned.  A  divorce  law  of  universal 
application  neither  can  nor  should  exist.  The 
judge,  when  enquiring  into  the  reasons,  must 
above  all  things  take  the  individual  circum- 
stances into  account.  What  will  be  a  sound  and 
sufficient  reason  for  granting  divorce  in  one  case 
will  not  hold  good  at  all  in  another.  If  a 
delicately  bred  woman  is  physically  ill-treated 


LAW  OF  INHERITANCE  267 

by  her  husband  the  ensuing  breach  is  hardly  to 
be  healed ;  here  is  an  undoubted  plea  for  divorce, 
although  it  would  hardly  be  so  if  a  peasant  wife 
were  to  get  a  couple  of  buffets  from  her  better 
half.  The  peasant  goes  on  the  principle  that  a 
good  thrashing  is  a  part  of  married  life,  and  his 
wife  will  take  it  quietly  without  considering  it 
an  indelible  affront ;  her  sense  of  honour  is  not 
so  sensitive.  To  put  such  a  case  forward  as 
ground  for  a  divorce  would  be  a  piece  of  sheer 
irresponsibility. 

It  is  evident  that  a  reasonably  constituted 
jury  might  deal  very  successfully  with  just  this 
kind  of  moral  question.  The  greatest  possible 
assurance  of  a  just  decision  would  be  secured  by 
twelve  persons  of  the  same  class  or  the  same 
station  in  life  as  the  disputing  couple  declaring 
upon  oath  their  conviction  that  the  marriage 
was  so  morally  destroyed  that  it  could  not 
continue  to  exist.  But,  unfortunately,  Radical- 
ism has  taken  care  to  make  this  impossible,  as, 
according  to  them,  class  divisions  are  to  disappear. 
We  must  keep  to  the  general  principle  that  laxity 
about  divorce  is  far  more  reprehensible  than 
over-severity.  The  multitude  of  separation  cases 
is  a  dark  spot  in  our  civilization,  and  a  proof 
that  these  deeply  serious  matters  are  no  longer 
regarded  in  the  light  of  Christianity. 

The  legal  conception  of  the  meaning  of  pro- 
perty was  formulated  through  the  recognition 
of  the  family  in  the  legal  sense.  Bed  and  board 
are  already  bound  together  in  common  parlance, 
family  and  property  have  been  evolved  together 
and  in  kindred  forms,  for,  broadly  speaking, 


268  THE  FAMILY 

the  history  of  property  is  its  development  from 
communal  holding  to  free  individual  ownership. 
There  is  no  better  proof  of  the  connection  between 
this  and  the  family  than  the  institution  of  the 
law  of  inheritance,  without  which  there  can  be 
no  secure  sense  of  ownership.  The  right  of 
succession  in  its  ideal  sense  implies  the  con- 
tinued working  in  the  present  of  the  will  of  past 
generations.  For  the  majority  of  men  the 
making  of  their  will  is  the  only  evidence  they 
have  that,  as  human  beings,  they  have  an 
historical  enduringness  denied  to  the  brute 
creation.  Aristocratic  States  often  pay  too  little 
heed  to  the  actual  present  and  the  rights  and 
interests  of  living  men,  while  democracies  incline 
to  shut  out  the  past  entirely.  England  is  very 
remarkable  in  that,  according  to  the  letter  of 
the  law,  there  are  very  wide  testamentary 
powers,  but  a  custom,  rooted  in  antiquity  and 
stronger  than  the  written  law,  has  long  prescribed 
an  inalienability  of  landed  property,  which  all 
goes,  by  virtue  of  this  ancient  usage,  to  the 
eldest  son,  together  with  a  large  portion  of  the 
personalty.  England  owes  the  existence  of  its 
large  settled  estates  purely  to  its  law  of  entail 
upon  the  first-born.  In  France,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  barren  notion  of  Egalite  has  destroyed 
all  personal  freedom.  What  a  tyrannical  prin- 
ciple it  is  which  dictates  the  equal  division  of 
the  property  between  husband  and  wife,  and 
the  partitioning  of  the  estate  according  to  the 
number  of  the  children,  so  that  the  man  is  left 
with  no  power  to  dispose  of  the  possessions 
which  his  own  exertions  have  earned.  The 


THE  FAMILY  269 

moment  the  father  dies  the  officials  arrive  to 
affix  seals  upon  everything,  and  an  insufferable 
rummaging  among  the  household  goods  begins 
by  authority  of  the  State.  The  limitation  of 
families  to  two  children  is  very  intimately 
connected  with  this  system  of  inheritance  ;  it 
is  the  refuge  of  the  man  of  moderate  means  from 
the  prospect  of  leaving  all  his  offspring  poor 
if  he  has  many  of  them.  The  English  custom 
is  not  without  its  own  drawbacks,  but  upon  the 
whole  we  must  prefer  it,  with  the  great  liberty 
it  leaves  to  the  testator,  to  the  tyranny  of  the 
democratic  law  of  France,  where  all  are  treated 
alike. 


VIII 
RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

WE  turn  now  from  the  simplest  forms  of  State- 
membership,  the  family  and  the  clan,  to  consider 
nationalities,  races,  and  tribes.  I  have  made 
use  of  the  word  "  nationality  "  l  because  in  science 
it  is  impossible  to  form  clear  conceptions  without 
employing  such  foreign  terms.  The  strength  of 
the  German  language  shows  itself  precisely  in  its 
ability  to  assimilate  so  many  of  them.  We  will 
not  allow  ourselves  to  be  abused  for  this  pride 
of  our  nation  in  its  cosmopolitanism  in  the  best 
sense  of  the  word,  which  gives  us  power  to  take 
for  ourselves  the  undying  parts  of  the  speech 
of  other  peoples.  Any  one  who  is  capable  of 
thinking  historically  will  realize  how  completely 
such  words  as  Majestdt2  and  gravittitisch*  have 
become  part  of  the  German  language.  The 
word  gravittitisch  has  been  so  skilfully  assimilated 
that  already  the  very  spirit  of  the  seventeenth 
century  seems  to  breathe  through  its  syllables. 
Our  speech,  as  the  poet  says,  has  not  only  passed 
through  the  oak  forests  of  primeval  Germany,  but 
also  through  the  palaces  of  princes,  and  yet  it 

1  Translator's  note  :  "  Nationalitat." 
2  Translator's  note :  "  Majesty."  3  "  Solemn." 

270 


NATIONALITY  271 

remains  to-day  what  it  always  was.  It  has 
absorbed  certain  elements,  and  again  rejected 
others,  nor  should  we  always  accept  the  treasures 
of  foreign  speech  which  it  has  drawn  unto  itself. 
The  word  "  nation  "  will  be  used  by  preference  in 
the  political  sense.  The  meaning  attached  to 
it  in  ordinary  speech  is  in  any  case  extremely 
capricious  ;  if  we  wish  to  express  clearly  that  we 
desire  to  convey  the  idea  of  a  common  blood,  we 
must  use  the  expression  "nationality."  Every- 
body knows  what  is  meant  by  "  the  right  of 
nationality,"  and  it  is  in  this  sense  that  we 
shall  use  the  term. 

It  is  quite  clear  that  difference  of  descent 
was  not  brought  about  by  the  State,  but  existed 
before  it.  But  it  is  no  less  clear  that  the  State 
must  try  to  penetrate  with  the  same  speech  and 
culture  all  those  whom  it  unites.  We  cannot 
repeat  too  often  that  political  science  requires 
nowadays  an  unprejudiced  historical  judgment 
before  all  else.  It  must  finally  tear  itself  free 
from  the  abstractions  of  Natural  Right  and  the 
resultant  revolutionary  political  doctrines,  which 
sought  after  principles  rather  than  forces  in  the 
current  of  historical  life.  The  dominating  idea 
was  always  that  fixed  written  principles  ruled 
historical  existence,  and  that  living  facts  had  to 
shape  themselves  by  them.  Such  hollow  abstrac- 
tions must  be  finally  destroyed. 

The  one  which  chiefly  occupies  the  minds  of 
the  present  day  is  the  so-called  principle  of 
nationality.  The  reason  is  not  difficult  to  grasp. 
We  are  still  under  the  influence  of  the  reaction 
against  the  Napoleonic  world-empire.  It  was 


272     RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

perfectly  natural  that  this  attempt  should  arouse 
the  consciousness  of  nationality  to  an  energy 
which  had  never  been  felt  before.  Both  Italy 
and  Germany  offered  the  imposing  spectacle  of 
two  great  peoples  rising  to  the  attainment  of 
a  political  unity.  We  see  the  same  forces  work- 
ing where  they  are  in  opposition  to  ourselves. 
The  law  of  historical  ingratitude  still  holds  good  ; 
often,  indeed,  has  it  operated  in  Germany  ! 
We  displayed  it  ourselves  towards  the  Romans, 
and  now  the  sub- German  peoples,  who  are  our 
debtors  for  the  whole  of  their  civilization,  are 
showing  it  towards  us.  In  the  sixteenth  century 
the  Scandinavian  nations  began  to  work  for  their 
independence ;  now  we  see  the  same  process 
going  on  in  the  south-east.  All  the  races  in 
Austria  have  to  thank  us  Germans  for  their 
culture,  yet  now  we  see  the  weapons,  with  which 
we  have  ourselves  supplied  them,  turned  against 
the  power  of  Germany. 

Thus  our  century  is  filled  with  national 
antagonisms,  and  it  is  not  surprising  therefore 
that  there  should  have  been  talk  of  setting 
up  a  principle  of  nationality.  If  we  keep  our 
vision  clear  from  the  confusions  of  Napoleonic 
phraseology,  we  see  that  there  are  two  strong 
forces  working  in  history  ;  firstly,  the  tendency 
of  every  State  to  amalgamate  its  population  in 
speech  and  manners  into  one  single  mould,  and 
secondly,  the  impulse  of  every  vigorous  nation- 
ality to  construct  a  State  of  its  own.  It  is 
obvious  that  we  have  here  two  divergent  forces, 
which  generally  oppose  and  struggle  against 
each  other.  We  have  next  to  discover  what 


NATIONALITY  273 

settlement  they  arrive  at.  That  the  conceptions 
of  Nation  and  State  should  merge  into  one  is 
the  tendency  of  all  great  nations,  but  history 
shows  us  how  far  this  is  from  being  actually  put 
into  practice.  The  superiority  of  Western  culture 
arises  from  the  fact  that  Western  Europe  has 
larger  compact  ethnological  masses,  while  the 
East  is  the  classic  soil  for  the  fragments  of 
nations.  This  alone  would  be  enough  to  make 
it  very  difficult  for  the  Oriental  State  to  attain 
to  any  inward  unity.  It  must  content  itself 
with  external  administration  and  the  exaction 
by  the  ruling  race  of  tribute  and  submission. 
Russia  and  Austria  are  in  this  respect  countries 
of  transition  between  East  and  West ;  the  ethno- 
graphical conditions  in  these  empires  are  already 
more  Oriental  than  European,  and  hence  comes 
the  exotic  character  of  the  whole  life  of  the 
State. 

Thus  we  see  two  great  forces  which  may  either 
work  in  harmony  or  in  discord  with  one  another. 
Furthermore,  it  is  clear  that  the  idea  of  nation- 
ality is  the  more  active,  and  itself  forms  part  of 
the  current  of  history.  Almighty  God  did  not 
separate  the  nations  into  glass  cases  as  if  they 
were  botanical  specimens,  and  we  can  see  for 
ourselves  how  history  has  moulded  them  all. 
Nationality  is  no  permanent  thing ;  there  are 
great  nations  whose  original  character  and  native 
genius  have  never  quite  been  lost,  but  we  can 
trace  how  it  has  mingled  with  other  streams. 
The  Greeks  and  the  Germans  are  instances  of 
two  primitive  peoples  whose  own  peculiar  genius 
has  never  been  subdued  ;  even  the  iron  strength 

VOL.  I  T 


274      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

of  the  Roman  Empire  was  powerless  against 
them.  It  was  easy  enough  to  establish  military 
colonies  on  German  soil,  but  to  Romanize  the 
Germans  was  an  impossibility.  When  our  fore- 
fathers marched  as  conquerors  into  Rome,  how- 
ever, the  ethnographical  process  was  reversed  : 
the  superior  civilization  revenged  itself  upon 
the  victors.  The  Lombards  retained  their 
German  speech  comparatively  long,  the  Ostro- 
goths never  discarded  it,  but  their  Empire  was 
shorter-lived.  In  far  the  greater  number  of  the 
other  German  States  established  on  Roman 
soil  we  see  the  conquerors  adopting  pretty 
quickly  the  language  and  customs  of  the  more 
highly  civilized  vanquished  race.  The  Visigoths 
became  Spaniards,  the  Burgundians  Gauls. 

In  addition  to  this  we  find  some  periods  in 
history  filled  with  the  cosmopolitan  spirit,  while 
others  display  as  strong  a  tendency  towards 
national  cleavage.  At  times  some  common  in- 
tellectual movement  stirs  all  nations  to  such  an 
extent  that  national  antagonisms  withdraw  into 
the  background.  The  epoch  of  the  Reformation 
was  one  of  these  ;  at  that  time  the  struggle  for 
religious  truth  took  such  hold  upon  men's  hearts 
that  in  every  nation  the  alien  co-religionists 
drew  together  against  their  kindred  who  were 
enemies  of  their  faith.  History  in  its  fruitfulness 
will  somewhere  and  some  day  produce  the  same 
phenomena  again. 

It  is  safe  to  assert  that  the  energy  of  national 
feeling  works  differently  in  the  different  nations. 
Some  there  are  in  whom  narrowness  of  outlook 
is  innate.  This  applies  most  particularly  to  the 


NATIONALITY  275 

insular  nations,  and  as  we  think  to  the  English. 
The  Germans  are  their  very  anti-type,  far  the 
greater  number  of  them  being  naturally  cosmo- 
politan. Our  people  are  for  ever  struggling  with 
themselves ;  they  have  at  length  so  overcome 
their  perpetual  assimilation  of  foreign  elements 
as  to  find  time  to  think  of  themselves.  This 
peculiarity  of  the  German  nature  should  be 
described  by  the  word  selbstlos  (self-less),  a  term 
whose  meaning  has  been  so  thoughtlessly  abused 
by  our  journalists. 

Thus  manifold  have  been  the  conflicting  in- 
fluences of  the  various  living  forces  of  history 
in  national  questions.  When  we  examine  these 
complicated  conditions  more  closely  we  find 
first  of  all  a  great  antagonism  of  races  among 
human  kind.  We  need  not  dwell  here  upon  those 
newly  discovered  by  our  geography.  No  doubt 
the  Berbers  of  Northern  Africa,  the  Australian 
Aborigine,  and  the  Malays  are  specific  races,  but 
the  historian  need  only  concern  himself  with  the 
broad  divisions  of  white,  black,  red,  and  yellow. 
The  yellow  race  has  never  achieved  political  liberty, 
for  their  States  have  always  been  despotic  and 
unfree.  In  the  same  way  the  artistic  faculty  has 
always  been  denied  to  the  Mongols,  in  spite  of 
that  sense  of  comfort  which  we  may  admire 
among  the  Chinese,  if  we  are  soft  and  effeminate 
enough  to  wish  to.  The  black  races  have  always 
been  servants,  and  looked  down  upon  by  all  the 
others,  nor  has  any  negro  State  ever  raised  itself 
to  a  level  of  real  civilization.  Physical  strength 
and  endurance  are  such  marked  characteristics  in 
the  negro  that  he  is  employed  inevitably  to  serve 


276      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

the  ends  of  a  will  and  intelligence  higher  than  his 
own.  The  red  race  of  North  America,  although 
now  fallen  into  decay,  once  possessed  a  remarkable 
talent  for  State  building.  The  old  States  of  Peru 
knew  no  liberty  indeed,  but  they  had  brought 
administration  to  an  uncommon  pitch  of  perfec- 
tion, and  had  a  postal  service  and  a  police  force 
such  as  did  not  exist  in  Spain  at  the  time  of  the 
conquest  of  South  America.  The  red  and  yellow 
races  spring  from  a  common  stock.  Opposed  to 
them  stands  the  white  race,  which  falls  into  two 
classes,  the  Aryan  and  the  Semitic  peoples. 

These  divisions  are  tremendously  wide  and 
deep.  If  we  start  from  the  supposition  of  the 
descent  of  all  mankind  from  a  single  pair,  and 
if  we  are  still  so  fully  persuaded  of  the  equality 
of  all  men  in  the  eyes  of  God,  the  differentiation 
of  the  various  species  must  lie  in  an  immeasurably 
distant  past.  But  it  is  well  known  that  when 
Nature  has  once  carried  out  such  a  differentiation 
she  will  not  tolerate  any  attempt  to  go  back 
upon  it.  She  revenges  herself  for  any  mixture 
of  species  by  making  the  higher  type  give  way 
before  the  lower.  Even  as  by  the  interbreeding 
of  a  horse  and  a  donkey  a  creature  is  produced 
which  possesses  the  qualities  of  the  less  noble 
animal,  so  it  is  with  human  beings.  The  Mulatto 
is  a  mg<5£r  in  all  but  his  paler  skin ;  that  he  is 
aware  of  it  is*  shown  by  his  consorting  with 
other  blacks.  The  same  applies  to  mongrels. 
A  physical  disgust  subsists  between  whites  and 
blacks — the  white  cannot  endure  the  presence  of 
negroes  in  a  confined  space.  The  American  States 
are  obliged  to  run  compartments  for  negroes 


NATIONALITY  277 

only  upon  their  railways,  because  their  proximity 
is  intolerable  to  those  of  a  different  race.  If  the 
character  of  a  State  is  to  be  absolutely  deter- 
mined by  the  difference  of  races  within  it,  it  is 
quite  certain  that  political  freedom  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  word  is  impossible,  for  a  practical 
equality  can  never  exist  between  beings  which 
Nature  has  created  unequal.  In  North  America, 
even  after  slavery  was  abolished,  the  number 
of  negroes  who  actually  held  posts  under  the 
State  has  always  been  of  the  smallest.  The 
difference  of  capacities  is  so  great  that  this  will 
undoubtedly  always  be  the  case,  but  since  the 
black  population  is  in  a  minority,  freedom  is 
still  possible.  It  is  different  in  such  countries 
as  Hindustan,  where  the  whole  character  of  the 
State  is  modified  by  the  juxtaposition  of  different 
races.  Here  a  free  Constitution  is  not  practic- 
able, for  the  subjects  of  the  State  can  only  feel 
themselves  as  belonging  to  a  race  which  has, 
as  it  happens,  been  subjugated  by  a  foreign 
power.  Thus  the  contrast  between  races  will 
always  persist,  and  need  not  be  deplored,  for  the 
world  would  be  unbearably  uninteresting  if  they 
were  all  alike. 

These  great  racial  antagonisms  are  cripplmg 
to  the  State ;  the  differences  of  nationality 
within  one  race  are  more  easily  smoothed  over. 
But  how  is  nationality  to  be  exactly  defined  ? 
The  question  is  difficult  to  answer ;  in  some 
cases  a  whole  sequence  of  historical  facts  must  be 
taken  into  consideration  before  we  can  decide 
what  really  constitutes  a  nationality,  for  a  single 
proof  may  not  suffice.  Speech  is  the  most  rela- 


278      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

lively  certain  sign,  but  not  absolutely,  for  the 
Irish  are  most  assuredly  not  Englishmen,  although 
they  speak  English.  There  are  besides  nations 
of  wanderers,  such  as  the  Jews,  for  whom  the 
language  they  speak  has  no  inward  meaning,  but 
is  merely  the  convenient  method  of  expression. 
A  certain  number  of  European  Jews  have,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  succeeded  in  really  adopting  the 
nationality  of  the  people  among  whom  they  live, 
and  in  becoming  truly  Germans,  Frenchmen,  or 
Englishmen.  Every  one  will  recognize  Benjamin 
Disraeli  as  an  Englishman  through  and  through, 
even  in  certain  externals,  and  the  history  of  our 
own  literature  affords  instances  of  some  Jews 
whose  characteristics  are  essentially  German.  This 
is  pre-eminently  true  of  Moses  Mendelssohn,  but 
it  is  equally  certain  that  in  Berlin,  and  eastwards 
from  that  city,  there  are  many  Jews  who  are 
inwardly  real  Orientals,  in  spite  of  the  language 
they  speak. 

While  admitting  the  existence  of  such  essenti- 
ally homeless  peoples,  we  must  also  not  forget 
that  it  is  possible  for  single  groups  to  outgrow 
the  characteristics  of  their  old  national  com- 
munity in  the  course  of  their  political  and 
social  development. 

This  applies  to  the  German- Swiss,  and  in  a 
still  higher  degree  to  the  French- Swiss.  The 
dwellers  on  the  Lake  of  Geneva  are  of  the  same 
blood  as  the  people  of  Franche-Comte,  but  the 
whole  tone  of  their  life  is  so  totally  different 
from  the  superficiality  of  the  essentially  French 
nature  that  we  have  to  label  them  French- Swiss, 
not  French  out  and  out.  The  same  thing  may 


NATIONALITY  279 

be  said,  though  less  absolutely,  of  the  German- 
Swiss. 

We  can  follow  the  process  of  this  growth 
away  from  the  old  cradles  of  their  nationality, 
particularly  clearly  in  the  people  of  the  Nether- 
lands. They  are  of  low- German  stock,  such  as 
Saxons  and  Westphalians,  but  already  throughout 
the  Middle  Ages  they  led  a  separate  existence  ; 
then  followed  the  division  within  the  Hanseatic 
League  between  the  eastern  region  and  the 
Flemish  cities  of  the  west ;  and  finally  the  great 
War  of  Religion  in  which  Germany  failed  to 
stand  by  her  daughter  nation.  The  Dutch  de- 
veloped their  dialect  quite  consciously  into  an 
independent  language.  For  a  time,  and  until 
the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,  the  litera- 
ture of  the  Netherlands  was  cosmopolitan  and 
classical.  Leyden  was  the  headquarters  of  the 
Latin  culture  which  dominated  the  world. 
Gradually,  however,  they  began  to  cultivate 
their  mother  tongue,  and  to-day  Dutch  has  as 
much  ceased  to  be  a  dialect  of  German  as  has 
Portuguese  of  Spanish.  Its  grammatical  con- 
struction has  departed  widely  from  ours,  for  it 
has  adhered  to  the  logical  Latin  syntax.  What 
is  it  that  gives  this  language  its  irresistibly  comic 
touch  ?  It  is  nothing  but  a  sailor's  dialect, 
framed  to  express  the  lowest  and  most  ordinary 
ideas ;  therefore  when  it  would  raise  itself  to 
convey  the  conceptions  of  the  highest  educa- 
tion it  is  forced  to  employ  expressions  whose 
original  meaning  was  perfectly  trivial.  This  is  a 
most  instructive  instance  of  how  a  nationality 
may  become  transformed,  for  it  is  unmistak- 


280      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

able  that  the  modern  Dutch  are  Germans  no 
longer. 

So  it  is  possible  for  a  tribe  to  outgrow  its 
ancient  community,  and  it  is  also  possible  for 
this  nationality  to  develop  a  fresh  expansive 
impetus  of  its  own. 

Put  this  question  to  yourselves — What  is 
Germany,  in  the  historic  sense,  and  where  used 
her  boundaries  to  be  ?  The  whole  idea  of  what 
constitutes  our  country  has  altered.  About  one- 
third  of  the  territories  which  we  call  Germany 
to-day  were  first  won  for  her  five  or  six  hundred 
years  ago.  The  marvel  is  that  in  spite  of  this 
there  is  no  mistaking  what  the  German  spirit 
is.  The  real  German  is  absolutely  not  to  be 
confounded  with  any  other  people,  although 
the  frontiers  of  Germany  have  undergone  so 
many  changes  in  history. 

Thus  it  is  impossible  to  expound  the  facts  of 
history  genealogically  as  if  it  were  a  family  tree. 
We  must  rather  say  that  even  nationalities  are 
subject  to  the  currents  of  historical  life,  and  it 
is  equally  instructive  and  difficult  for  the  his- 
torian to  trace  out  these  ethnographical  fluctua- 
tions. Sometimes  he  seems  to  meet  with  a 
miracle.  Think  of  England  and  see  how  Anglo- 
Saxons  and  Normans  became  one  nation  after  a 
furious  national  struggle.  We  can  see  the  com- 
pleted process,  and  imagine,  from  our  knowledge 
of  individual  instances,  how  this  fusion  of  races 
comes  to  pass.  The  normal  condition,  however, 
is  that  the  unity  of  the  State  should  be  based  on 
nationality.  The  legal  bond  must  at  the  same 
time  be  felt  to  be  a  natural  one,  arising  automatic- 


281 

ally  out  of  a  blood-relationship  either  real  or 
imaginary  (for  on  this  point  nations  labour 
under  the  most  extraordinary  delusions).  Almost 
all  great  nations,  like  the  Athenians,  call  them- 
selves autochthonous,  and  boast,  nearly  always 
without  cause,  of  the  purity  of  their  blood.  Yet 
it  is  just  the  State-constructing  nations,  like 
the  Romans  and  the  English,  who  are  of  the  most 
strongly  mixed  race.  The  Arabs  and  the  Indians 
are  of  very  pure  blood,  but  no  one  can  say 
that  they  have  been  peculiarly  successful  State- 
builders  ;  their  strength  lies  in  quite  other 
directions. 

When  we  consider  the  ways  of  Germany  we 
find  that  the  inhabitants  of  large  parts  of  Hesse, 
of  Hanoverian  Lower  Saxony,  as  well  as  East 
Friesland,  Westphalia,  and  perhaps  Northern 
Thuringia  also,  are  of  quite  unmixed  Germanic 
blood.  We  can  recognize  this  even  at  the 
present  day.  Wherever  the  girls  carry  their 
burdens  on  their  heads  we  may  be  mathematically 
certain  that  there  the  Romans  have  been,  but 
never  when  the  load  is  carried  on  the  back  or 
in  the  hands.  No  one,  however,  would  try  to 
maintain  that  the  creative  political  strength  of 
Germany  resided  in  these  unmixed  Germanic 
stocks.  The  real  champions  and  pioneers  of 
civilization  in  Germany  in  the  Middle  Ages  were 
the  South  Germans,  who  have  a  Celtic  strain, 
and  in  modern  times  the  North  Germans,  who 
are  partly  Slav.  The  same  applies  to  Piedmont 
in  Italy.  In  France,  pure  Celtic  blood  is  now 
found  nowhere  except  in  Brittany.  The  Bretons 
have  always  been  a  valiant  little  people  ;  they 


282      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

furnish  the  best  soldiers  in  the  French  Army, 
since  the  loss  of  Alsace.  It  is,  however,  a  country 
of  bigotry ;  the  people  lead  a  calm,  idyllic 
existence,  but  the  constructive  political  gift 
could  never  be  ascribed  to  them. 

In  the  powerful  mill  through  which  a  nation 
is  ground  when  it  mingles  with  another,  the  softer 
•  sides  of  the  character  are  easily  destroyed, 
but  the  power  of  the  will  is  fortified.  So  it  is  ; 
and  to  that  you  must  add  that  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  a  purely  national  history,  for  the 
process  of  give  and  take  and  the  influence  of 
cosmopolitan  forces  will  always  almost  entirely 
form  the  basis  of  historic  life.  On  the  other 
hand,  all  true  heroism,  whether  in  literature  or 
politics,  must  be  national  if  it  is  not  to  be 
powerless  in  the  moral  sense.  When  we  take 
both  these  great  contradictions  together  we  see 
that  there  is  nothing  to  be  gained  from  barren 
talk  about  a  right  of  nationality.  Every  State 
has  the  right  to  allow  the  nations  it  contains 
to  amalgamate,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  every 
nationality  will  feel  the  impulse  to  make  itself 
politically  independent. 

It  is  clear  that  these  two  tendencies  must  of 
necessity  lead  to  manifold  contradictions  in  an 
old  world  where  national  divisions  cannot  be 
very  sharply  defined,  and  it  is  also  obvious  that 
national  unity  is  the  most  conservative  founda- 
tion for  a  State,  for  it  contains  the  outward  con- 
ditions for  preservation  of  peace.  Aristotle 
observes  that  peoples  of  different  races  incline 
to  unrest  until  they  have  inwardly  amalgamated. 

When  several  nations  are  united  under  one 


GERMANS  IN  RUSSIA  283 

State,  the  simplest  relationship  is  that  the  one 
which  wields  the  authority  should  also  be  the 
superior  in  civilization.  Matters  can  then  de- 
velop comparatively  peacefully,  and  when  the 
blending  is  complete  it  is  felt  to  have  been  in- 
evitable, although  it  can  never  be  accomplished 
without  endless  misery  for  the  subjugated  race. 
The  most  remarkable  fusion  took  place  after  this 
fashion  in  the  colonies  of  North-East  Germany. 
It  was  the  murder  of  a  people  ;  that  cannot  be 
denied,  but  after  the  amalgamation  was  complete 
it  became  a  blessing.  What  could  the  Prussians 
have  contributed  to  history  ?  The  Germans 
were  so  infinitely  their  superiors  that  to  be 
Germanized  was  for  them  as  great  a  good  fortune 
as  it  was  for  the  Wends. 

Even  where  the  intermixture  under  these 
conditions  is  not  completely  successful,  an  alien 
nationality  may  still  be  entrusted  with  certain 
rights  of  its  own,  if  it  deserves  them.  We 
pursued  this  policy  with  Posen,  when  it  was 
made  into  a  Grand-Duchy  and  received  a  banner 
of  its  own.  But  how  were  we  repaid  ?  By 
continual  fresh  treasons  on  the  part  of  the  Poles  ; 
by  constantly  recurring  revolts.  Thus  the  State 
was  forced  to  treat  this  province  simply  as  a 
province,  and  to  revoke  the  promises  made  to  it. 
The  great  Bismarckian  system  set  us  at  last 
upon  the  right  road  in  Posen,  and  under  him  we 
were  on  the  point  of  Germanizing  education. 
Now  on  the  contrary  we  are  permitting  German 
Catholic  children  to  be  given  instruction  in  Polish, 
under  the  name  of  private  lessons.  The  whole 
point  of  the  conflict  is  that  Protestantism  and 


284      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

Germanism  are  there  held  to  be  synonymous,  and 
that  an  attempt  is  being  made  to  infuse  Polish 
sympathies  into  the  German  Catholics.  To 
proffer  the  schools  in  order  that  German  children 
may  receive  private  lessons  in  Polish  is  a  shock- 
ing piece  of  folly.  Prince  Bismarck  disposed  of 
it  very  summarily.  His  policy  was  the  natural 
policy  of  a  great  State,  conscious  of  itself. 

We  Germans  to-day  are  in  evil  case.  The  time 
has  come,  as  we  have  seen  already,  when  the  sub- 
German  peoples  are  beginning  to  awake  to  con- 
sciousness of  themselves.  Up  to  a  certain  point 
this  is  justified.  It  is  undeniable  that  Peter  the 
Great's  innovating  methods  with  the  Russians 
were  arbitrary.  For  a  Russian  who  holds  his 
nationality  superior  to  the  German,  the  reaction 
apparent  to-day  is  easily  comprehensible. 

Every  nation  over-estimates  itself.  Without 
this  feeling  of  itself  it  would  also  lack  the  con- 
sciousness of  being  a  community ;  as  Fichte 
truly  said,  "  a  nation  cannot  dispense  with 
arrogance."  The  same  is  true  of  the  little  nations ; 
the  less  they  have  to  show  for  it,  the  more  pride 
they  feel. 

The  Germanic  element  in  the  Baltic  Provinces 
had  fenced  itself  about  with  various  territorial 
privileges,  even  as  the  Poles  in  Posen  have  had 
their  separate  rights ;  but  the  Germans  in 
Livonia  have  never  damaged  theirs  by  rebellion, 
nor  has  the  Czar  ever  had  more  loyal  subjects 
anywhere  than  they.  Nay,  more,  these  German 
Baltic  provinces  were  not  only  innocuous  to 
the  Czar's  dominion,  but  were  invaluable  to  the 
civilization  of  the  Russian  Empire.  They  have 


NATIONALITY  AND  LANGUAGE     285 

produced  a  veritable  legion  of  men  who  have 
done  remarkable  service  to  the  State,  both  in  the 
civil  and  military  spheres.  Russia  has  a  thousand 
motives,  therefore,  for  preserving  the  Germanic 
element  in  this  region,  especially  because  it  is 
in  nowise  propagandist.  Now,  however,  the 
ancient,  aristocratic  Provincial  Constitution  has 
been  withdrawn,  and  an  effort  is  being  made  to 
force  the  German  population  down  into  the 
democratic  welter  of  despotic  Russia,  for  a 
democratic  despotism  is  the  truly  fundamental 
characteristic  of  the  Russian  Empire.  This 
attempt  to  de- Germanize  a  German  country, 
whose  vicinity  has  never  brought  anything  but 
benefit  to  Russia,  can  only  be  described  as 
barbarous.  If  these  dwellers  in  the  Baltic 
provinces  were  not  Germans,  and  as  such  up- 
holders of  the  superior  civilization,  if  they  had 
not  deserved  so  much  at  the  hands  of  the  State, 
the  Russian  Government  would  be  less  to  blame 
for  many  an  unscrupulous  act  perpetrated  upon 
them. 

There  are  other  cases  of  amalgamation  be- 
tween nations  in  which  the  strength  of  the 
dominant  people  does  not  show  itself  in  what 
we  call  culture,  but  rather  in  a  certain  kind  of 
conventional  dexterity.  Upon  this  reposed  the 
superiority  of  the  Romans  when  they  subdued 
the  tribes  of  Italy.  They  were  not  only  the 
exponents  of  a  firm  political  administration, 
but  they  also  possessed  a  peculiar  power  of 
receptivity  for  a  higher  civilization,  which  the 
Etruscans  lacked.  For  the  very  reason  that  they 
did  not  themselves  possess  many  of  the  higher 


286     RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

gifts  of '  civilization,  the  Romans  were  capable 
of  absorbing  the  culture  of  the  Hellenes.  Thus 
it  came  about  that  the  want  of  intellectual  depth 
in  the  Roman  spirit  became  in  itself  a  uniting 
bond. 

This  fortunate  circumstance  of  the  dominating 
nationality  being  at  the  same  time  the  bringer 
or  the  spreader  of  a  superior  civilization  does 
not,  however,  always  occur.  Sometimes  the 
very  reverse  is  the  case,  and  then,  as  we  have 
seen,  civilization  takes  its  revenge  for  its  political 
subjection.  The  political  victors  adopt  the 
language  of  the  vanquished.  We  observe,  in 
the  migration  of  races,  how  the  strong  German 
races  gradually  became  imbued  with  Roman 
civilization,  and  soon  became  proud  of  having 
assimilated  it  to  themselves.  Such  an  inter- 
mingling of  speech  and  customs  gives  rise  to 
many  transitional  phenomena ;  Jacob  Grimm 
refers  to  them  again  and  again.  When  words 
and  institutions  are  transferred  from  one  nation 
to  another,  the  form  is  first  changed,  while  the 
substance  remains  unaltered.  The  Latin  root 
of  such  words  as  regieren,  spazieren  persists,  but 
the  inflection  takes  on  the  German  form.  Simi- 
larly the  English  language  later  adopted  a 
quantity  of  French  words,  but  gave  them  the 
German  inflection.  The  same  thing  applies  to 
institutions.  In  the  case  of  the  adoption  of  a 
foreign  law,  the  form  or  application  of  it  is  first 
converted,  while  in  essentials  it  remains  for  long 
the  same. 

In  all  this  we  perceive  the  tremendous  im- 
portance of  form,  most  especially  in  the  history 


LATINS  AND  TEUTONS  287 

of  national  civilization.  Even  when  two  peoples 
come  into  peaceful  contact  with  one  another, 
both  sides  begin  inevitably  to  try  to  mould 
the  speech  of  the  other.  Here  certain  homely 
influences  come  into  play.  In  German  we  speak 
correctly  of  the  "  mot  her- tongue,"  not  the 
"  father-tongue,"  for  the  child  does  in  fact  learn 
its  speech  from  its  mother  ;  in  the  same  way  the 
processes  of  national  amalgamation  depend  more 
upon  the  women  than  the  men.  The  fact  that 
women  are  more  appreciative  of  beauty  of  form 
than  men  are,  explains  in  many  cases  the  reason 
why,  when  two  equally  great  nations  meet,  that 
one  prevails  which  has  the  superiority  in  its  out- 
ward forms.  Let  us  examine  for  a  moment  how 
the  German  element  has  lost  ground  in  the 
South  Tyrol.  In  the  sixteenth  century  Trent 
was  still  half  a  German  town,  now  it  is  completely 
Italianized;  the  foreigners  have  advanced  step 
by  step  in  the  last  few  hundred  years.  The 
causes  of  their  progress  are  economic,  for  this 
was  the  very  home  of  a  particularly  sturdy 
Germanic  stock.  Upon  one  side  we  find  the 
burly  forms  of  the  red-jerkined  countrymen  of 
Andreas  Hofer.  Over  against  these  men,  who 
were  so  avid  of  present  enjoyment,  we  have  the 
shrewd,  thrifty,  niggardly  Italian.  He  bought 
out  one  German  peasant  proprietor  after  another, 
and  thus  the  language  frontier  drew  constantly 
back  towards  the  north.  The  second,  perhaps 
still  more  important,  influence  at  work  is  that 
of  forms.  Italian  civilization  is  not  indeed 
higher  than  our  own,  but  it  is  older.  In  the 
days  when  we  were  still  savages,  they  had  long 


288     RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

been  a  civilized  nation.  This  ancient  culture 
makes  itself  felt  in  the  manner  of  their  social 
intercourse,  and  in  the  urbanity  of  their  char- 
acter ;  they  are  essentially  city- dwellers  in  their 
good  points  as  well  as  their  bad  ones.  The 
feminine  temperament  is  particularly  accessible 
to  the  outward  superiority  of  these  thoroughly 
cultivated  courteous  manners,  and  in  mixed 
marriages  it  is  easy  enough  to  understand  how 
the  German  woman  takes  the  Italian  character- 
istics of  her  husband,  while  the  reverse  is  seldom 
or  never  the  case. 

We  are  bound  to  say  that  the  Latin  races 
have  done  much  to  further  the  processes  of 
national  amalgamation,  for  the  very  reason  that 
they  content  themselves,  after  the  fashion  of 
the  Romans,  with  a  stereotyped  ideal. 

There  is  absolutely  no  centrifugal  element  in 
Italy  and  France.  In  Dalmatia  the  Italianizing 
force  has  reached  such  a  point  that  it  is  necessary 
to  pierce  below  the  universal  crust  of  Italian 
culture  before  we  discover  that  the  bulk  of  the 
population  is  Slavonic.  The  towns  in  Istria  are 
all  upon  the  model  of  their  old  mistress,  Venice. 
This  capacity  of  the  Romans  for  imposing  their 
nationality  upon  others  is  less  inherent  in  the 
Germans.  The  German  temperament  is  deeper ; 
it  strives  to  mould  men's  characters  accord- 
ing to  its  own  ideas ;  a  far  more  difficult 
task,  and  therefore  much  oftener  unsuccessful. 
Hence  the  many  centrifugal  forces  in  German 
States.  England  herself,  despite  the  anglicizing 
of  the  language,  has  never  yet  succeeded  in 
inwardly  coercing  the  Emerald  Isle. 


NATIONAL  RESISTANCE  289 

In  Germany,  as  a  whole,  the  centrifugal 
elements  are  still  unendingly  various.  One 
reason  is  the  long-standing  discord  within  the 
German  race  itself,  which  has  naturally  impeded 
the  subjugation  of  other  nationalities.  Never- 
theless the  internal  contrasts  between  dispositions 
are  much  less  with  us  than  with  other  civilized 
nations.  We  have  no  such  divisions  as  exist 
between  the  Proven9al  and  the  Flemish  northern 
Frenchman  (who  is,  properly  speaking,  a  North 
German),  or  between  the  Sicilian  and  the  Pied- 
montese.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  some  of  our 
different  races  who  live  far  distant  from  each 
other  get  on  very  well  together.  The  Schleswig- 
Holsteiners  and  the  Swabians  have  always  been 
good  friends,  and  a  very  large  number  of  marriages 
take  place  between  the  inhabitants  of  Electoral 
Saxony  and  the  East  Prussians.  Both  stocks 
are  combative  in  the  highest  degree,  but  their 
differences  do  not  conflict.  On  the  other  hand, 
some  tribes  living  side  by  side  display  the  strongest 
dislike  for  one  another.  Who  does  not  know 
the  antagonism  between  the  Rhinelander  and  the 
Westphalian,  the  Bavarian  and  the  Swabian, 
etc.  ?  It  all  goes  to  prove,  however,  what  a 
strong  bond  of  inward  unity  our  people  possess. 
Long  ago  the  Romans  reported,  when  they  found 
Germans  first  in  the  Balkan  Peninsula  and  then 
again  in  Gaul,  that  here  was  a  people  who  had 
no  State  and  no  over-lord,  and  yet  one  was  so 
like  another  as  to  be  indistinguishable. 

Greeks  and  Germans,  perhaps  the  two  noblest 
nations  in  the  world's  history,  have  also  been 
the  most  cosmopolitan.  Out  of  the  Hellenism  of 

VOL.  i  u 


290     RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

Greece  sprang  the  cosmopolitan  Hellenism  of 
Alexander  the  Great,  and  later  the  Byzantine 
civilization;  from  Teutonism  went  forth  all  the 
"  Romanic  "  States ;  while  the  Romans,  precisely 
because  they  had  but  little  either  in  their  hearts 
or  heads,  displayed  national  energy  in  a  marked 
degree.  Roman  unity  was  primarily  made  up 
of  outward  forms.  It  was  founded  first  upon 
discipline  and  the  argument  of  the  corporal's 
cane.  Their  very  language  is  formed  to  express 
their  policy — soul -less,  but  with  a  wonderful 
intellectual  power  which  makes  it  an  indispensable 
part  of  the  equipment  of  an  educated  man. 
Nevertheless  how  long  it  was  before  Rome 
developed  a  literature,  and  when  it  came  it  was 
Greek  in  spirit,  though  written  with  Latin  words. 
But  a  whole  nation  submitted  to  these  forms, 
and  in  a  long  period  of  communal  life  evolved  a 
strength  of  national  instinct  which  we  Germans 
cannot  too  greatly  .envy. 

We  continue  to  be  the  people  which  has  the 
least  power  of  national  resistance.  This  is  even 
the  case  in  our  relations  with  our  Polish  neigh- 
bours, and  here  again  a  great  deal  depends  upon 
the  women.  Observe  how  marriages  are  con- 
tracted in  this  region  ;  in  Posen  it  is  the  rule  that 
the  wife  is  Polish,  the  husband  German.  This  i$ 
a  peculiar  phenomenon  :  two  nations  who  mutu- 
ally detest  each  other  are  yet  found  intermarrying. 
The  Germans  and  the  Wends  did  the  same, 
although  their  hatred  for  each  other  was  so 
deep-seated.  Now  Germans  marry  Poles,  but 
the  mother  takes  care  to  remain  Polish,  and  so 
it  goes  on. 


MIXED  NATIONALITIES  291 

The  attitude  of  the  Church  is  important  in 
these  processes  of  amalgamation.  The  Catholic 
Church  is  always  on  the  side  of  the  language  of 
the  inferior  civilization.  They  love  the  dialect 
of  the  people  better  than  the  speech  of  the 
educated,  for  they  find  more  support  among  the 
former  ;  hence  it  comes  that  the  clericals  on  our 
Eastern  frontier  are  out-and-out  Polish  in  sym- 
pathies. In  Belgium  they  take  the  Flemish 
part,  for  there  the  French  are  the  Freemasons. 

Thus  manifold  are  the  influences  which  co- 
operate in  the  intermixture  of  different  nations. 
The  normal  thing  is  for  one  of  them  gradually 
to  succeed  in  obtaining  the  dominion  over  the 
other  ;  then  a  State  language  comes  into  being, 
and  certain  separate  rights  can  be  agreed  upon, 
such  as  are  in  accordance  with  the  political 
resources  of  a  frontier  province. 

Cases  can  arise,  however,  where  the  absorption 
of  one  race  by  the  other  is  not  possible,  and  these 
lead  to  very  complicated  political  conditions.  It 
is  remarkable  in  how  many  different  ways  the 
problem  can  be  solved,  and  we  often  find  in 
history  that  the  same  circumstances  lead  to 
diametrically  opposite  results.  A  World-Empire 
may  be  constructed  by  the  absolute  ruling  will 
of  a  Caesar,  or  by  a  loosely-knit  form  of  associa- 
tion, as  in  North  America.  Thus,  too,  a  State 
in  which  the  nationalities  are  mixed  can  be 
most  easily  ruled  in  one  of  two  totally  contrasting 
ways  ;  either  by  a  federative  Republic,  in  which 
very  little  business  is  transacted  in  common, 
as  in  Switzerland  (where  neighbours  can  live  in 
peace  and  amity  in  spite  of  the  difference  of 


292     RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

nationality),  or  by  means  of  a  strong  despotic 
Government.  In  Switzerland  we  find  three 
nations  politically  united,  each  of  them  living 
on  the  borders  of  their  own  mother  -  country, 
and  so  comfortably  situated  upon  the  whole 
that  its  natural  power  of  attraction  is  not  a 
disturbing  factor.  In  German  and  French 
Switzerland  there  is  no  one  who  wishes  to  be 
either  German  or  French,  and  it  is  only  in  the 
Ticino  Canton  that  the  Italian  feeling  is  per- 
ceptible. There  is  no  room  in  the  new  Cantonal 
Constitution  for  any  yearnings  towards  the  great 
neighbouring  nationalities. 

The  other  form  of  Government  by  which  the 
coexistence  of  several  nations  within  one  State 
can  be  made  bearable  is  a  wise  Despotism, 
which  keeps  them  all  in  a  lethargy.  It  is  a 
singular  fact  that  these  national  questions 
become  more  dangerous  in  proportion  as  the 
Government,  which  was  originally  despotic, 
assumes  the  forms  of  freedom.  A  people,  as  a 
whole,  can  never  possess  the  patience  of  a  single 
ruler ;  in  national  questions  it  cannot  stand 
neutral.  In  this  matter  the  history  of  Denmark 
is  endlessly  instructive.  The  old  Denmark  ruled 
its  various  German  territories  quite  peacefully  ; 
no  one  in  Holstein  had  any  thoughts  about 
national  antagonisms  at  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  The  Court  at  Copenhagen 
was  German  in  culture,  the  German  language 
prevailed,  and  most  of  the  officials,  even  the 
highest,  such  as  Counts  Bernstorff,  Schimmel- 
mann,  etc.,  were  of  the  Holstein  nobility ;  there- 
fore the  Holsteiners  had  no  cause  to  feel  themselves 


THE  TURKS  293 

affronted.  But  with  the  Constitutional  forms 
there  came  a  change,  and  since  a  nationality 
cannot  be  forbearing,  the  Danes  began  to  misuse 
their  greater  numbers  in  order  to  annihilate 
the  Germans. 

It  therefore  remains  true  for  such  mixed 
States  that,  when  they  have  not  the  power  to 
organize  themselves  quite  loosely,  freer  forms 
of  government  are  dangerous.  Austria  has  learnt 
this  by  experience  since  the  founding  of  her 
Parliament.  Old  Austria,  like  the  Ottoman 
Empire,  pursued  a  very  skilful  policy  towards 
her  various  races  on  the  principle  of  divide  et 
impera.  Charles  V.  is  a  typical  figure  for  a  ruler 
of  this  kind.  Of  Brabantian  origin,  educated  in 
Castile,  he  became  more  and  more  of  a  Spaniard  as 
life  went  on,  but  in  Germany  it  was  only  quite 
gradually  that  he  came  to  be  regarded  as  a 
foreigner.  It  was  one  of  his  great  gifts  as  a 
ruler  to  be  able  to  assume  the  position  of  a  sort 
of  demi-god  without  appearing  to  any  one  of 
his  subject  peoples  in  the  light  of  a  stranger. 
Where  that  can  be  achieved,  the  divide  et  impera 
system  can  be  very  successfully  applied,  by  play- 
ing off  one  nation  against  another.  In  this  way 
Charles  tried  to  use  his  Spaniards  for  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  turbulent  Germans.  Our  gorge  rises 
at  the  spectacle  of  the  House  of  Hapsburg  inciting 
the  Magyar  against  the  German,  and  then  the 
Slav  against  the  Magyar. 

Conditions  such  as  these  prevent  the  States 
in  which  they  prevail  from  possessing  a  civiliza- 
tion of  their  own  in  the  highest  human  sense  of 
the  word.  For  good  or  for  evil,  he  who  would  be 


294      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

ruler  must  either  oppress  the  individual  nations 
or  else  attempt  to  pit  them  against  each  other. 
No  better  instance  can  be  found  than  the  history 
of  the  Ottoman  Empire.  The  rulership  of  the 
Turks  in  their  great  days  is  worthy  of  all  admira- 
tion, but  it  was  unproductive  from  beginning  to 
end.  Go  to  Hungary,  which  they  governed  for 
180  years,  and  what  traces  of  this  long  dominion 
do  you  find  to-day  ?  Nothing  but  the  tomb  of 
the  Father  of  Roses,  the  Prophet  of  Mohammed  ; 
that  is  absolutely  all.  They  only  understood 
how  to  make  their  Government  secure  for  the 
time  being,  but  that  they  could  do  in  masterly 
fashion.  Their  power  of  turning  the  weakness 
of  the  Giaours  to  good  account  compels  our 
admiration.  There,  in  a  corner  of  the  Bosphorus 
lies  Lampsacos,  where  Aphrodite  bore  her  tur- 
bulent son  ;  there,  too,  is  Lesbos,  home  of  in- 
cestuous love  ;  here  all  the  vices  were  first  cradled. 
Well  did  the  Turks  know  how  to  avail  themselves 
of  the  material  which  lay  ready  to  their  hand, 
by  allowing  the  Greeks  to  tear  one  another  to 
pieces.  They  possessed  the  gift  of  sowing  discord 
and  ruling  through  it,  in  the  highest  degree. 

When  the  Constitution  is  freer,  and  the  people 
is  made  up  of  several  nationalities,  the  problems 
of  Government  become  more  and  more  difficult, 
and  give  rise  to  a  multitude  of  experiments 
such  as  we  have  seen  attempted  by  the  Emperor 
Francis  Joseph  of  Austria.  History  has  never 
produced  any  other  monarch  like  Francis  Joseph  ; 
he  has  tried  almost  every  conceivable  political 
system,  and  therefore  the  confusion  which  has 
ensued  is  indescribable.  There  is  no  doubt  that 


HUNGARY  295 

the  partition  of  Austria  is  simply  a  recurrence 
to  old  historical  conditions.  Its  organizer  was 
Maria  Theresa,  but  she  was  not  its  originator, 
for  the  Dual  Monarchy  is  as  old  as  the  Crown  of 
Stephen.  The  already  existent  form  was  settled 
by  Maria  Theresa  on  the  fixed  basis,  by  which 
the  Hungarian  Kingdom  was  left  under  its  old 
Constitution,  while  the  Cisleithan  territories  were 
gathered  up  under  the  administration  of  the 
Austrian  Imperial  Chancery,  thus  following  out 
the  trend  of  Austrian  history. 

With  the  awakening  of  national  feeling  the 
national  conditions  in  Hungary  became  more 
and  more  difficult  to  manage,  and  the  Magyar 
aristocracy,  who  were  always  the  dominant 
party  in  the  State,  obtained  so  great  a  mastery 
that  the  position  of  the  other  nationalities  was 
often  unendurable.  Every  State  must  have 
one  official  language,  in  which  to  transact 
the  business  of  Parliament.  In  the  Cisleithan 
Parliament  German  is  the  only  tongue  which 
everybody  understands.  Therefore  the  old 
Empire  rightly  chose  Latin  for  the  language  of 
the  State.  Its  common  use  injured  no  one's 
feelings,  and  it  was  in  consequence  particularly 
well  adapted  for  practical  ends.  It  was  a 
thoroughly  bad  and  ridiculous  dog- Latin  which 
was  spoken,  but  it  kept  the  peace  between  the 
nations.  Then  in  the  nineteenth  century  began 
the  stormy  Magyar  movement,  and  Magyar  was 
made  the  official  language.  Here  lay  a  source 
of  deadly  offence  for  the  Germans,  who  there 
possess  a  language  of  literature  and  culture. 
Moreover,  Magyar  is  very  difficult  to  learn,  as 


296      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

its  grammar  is  on  the  principle  of  agglutination, 
not  of  inflection  ;  totally  different  in  its  genius 
from  our  own.  This  speech  of  a  minority  was 
thus  imposed  upon  the  other  nations,  and  so  it 
all  went  on.  It  is  only  quite  recently  that  signs 
of  a  change  have  begun  to  manifest  themselves, 
in  the  Magyar  nobility  beginning  to  come  to  a 
better  understanding  with  the  worthy  Saxon 
peasantry.  The  danger  which  threatens  from 
the  Vlaks  is  working  here  as  a  uniting  force.  In 
other  respects  the  arrangements  in  Hungary 
are  still  very  unreasonable  in  many  ways,  and 
the  compulsory  language  is  used  in  a  ridiculous 
manner.  On  the  railways  the  time-tables  are 
all  made  out  in  Magyar,  but  if  you  mention  the 
Magyar  name  for  the  place  at  the  booking-office 
you  are  asked  in  German  what  it  means  ;  the 
official  does  not  recognize  these  artificially  made- 
up  names. 

We  have,  in  addition,  to  reckon  with  the 
peculiar  characteristics  of  the  Germans  in  Hun- 
gary. There  are  only  two  regions  there  where 
the  German  element  has  maintained  itself  worthily 
and  courageously  ;  the  beautiful  Saxon  province 
of  Transylvania,  which  cherishes  so  touching 
an  affection  for  us  that  it  is  always  sad  to  think 
how  powerless  we  are  to  help  the  poor  little 
people.  German  civilization  is  so  strong  among 
them,  however,  that  we  may  allow  ourselves  to 
hope  that  it  will  some  day  make  its  own  way. 
The  same  applies  to  the  Protestant  Germans 
in  Croatia.  The  remainder,  almost  all  of  them 
Catholics,  are  the  saddest  examples  of  the 
Germanic  race  which  are  anywhere  to  be  found. 


THE  JEWS  297 

Such  a  depth  of  national  degradation  is  positively 
horrible  to  behold,  and  it  is  disgraceful  also, 
since  the  Germans  used  always  to  be  the  cham- 
pions of  material  and  intellectual  civilization  in 
Hungary.  Ofen  is  as  good  a  German  town  as 
Berlin,  except  for  a  few  Magyars  who  live  there  ; 
and  now  it  has  become  Buda-Pesth  ;  so  named 
because  it  lies  opposite  a  preponderatingly  Jewish 
town  with  Magyar  characteristics,  and  must 
needs  be  called  after  it.  In  the  same  way  the 
German  theatre  too  has  gradually  disappeared. 

On  the  other  side  the  so-called  Cisleithanians, 
gathered  of  necessity  under  the  control  of  the 
Imperial  Parliament,  are  also  suffering  from 
passionate  national  antagonisms.  Besides  this, 
nothing  could  be  more  unfortunate  than  the 
geographical  circumstances,  because  to  the 
Danube  territory  proper  is  added  on  the  one  hand 
Dalmatia,  on  the  other  Galicia,  both  far- distant 
provinces  with  which  the  Danube  lands  have 
nothing  whatever  to  do.  The  Poles  have  been 
the  wisest ;  they  sit  firm  in  the  Imperial  Parlia- 
ment, and  generally  give  the  casting  vote.  All 
this  introduces  incalculable  factors  into  the 
situation,  and  it  is  impossible  to  forecast  even 
the  immediate  future.  Federalistic  experiments 
are  not  likely  to  be  tried  again.  The  State  which 
has  acquiesced  in  the  Dual  System  will  not  under- 
take them  any  more  in  its  western  territories. 
One  other  plan  might  still  be  feasible.  The  edge 
might  be  to  some  extent  taken  off  the  racial 
enmities,  if  an  itio  in  paries  were  assured  to  all 
the  nationalities.  If  no  party  were  permitted 
to  overrule  the  other  in  educational  legislation, 


298      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

etc.,  but  the  Crown  be  made  the  final  arbiter, 
elections  might  lose  their  bitterness,  and  internal 
harmony  be  better  secured.  So  great,  however, 
is  the  harshness  of  national  feeling  that  no  one 
feels  any  desire  to  smooth  it  over. 

In  the  immediate  future,  then,  it  will  still  be 
Austria's  destiny  to  be  torn  with  internal  struggles. 
Moreover,  there  is  the  sad  fact  that  even  in 
Cisleithania  Teutonism  still  goes  upon  a  broken 
wing.  The  fine  German  culture  of  Vienna  in 
the  Middle  Ages  has  long  since  vanished.  In 
the  eighteenth  century  music  was  the  only  form 
of  creative  art  in  which  Austria  excelled,  and 
music  does  not  influence  national  character  as 
poetry  does.  In  more  recent  times  there  has 
been  more  approximation  to  the  German  spirit, 
but  on  the  other  hand  Austrian  Germanism  has 
been  unspeakably  corrupted  by  Semitism.  It 
is  clear  that  in  such  a  country  an  experimental 
and  make-shift  policy  is  unavoidable. 

The  Jews  play  a  quite  abnormal  part  in  this 
singular  whirlpool  of  national  antagonisms.  Once 
on  a  time,  when  they  were  still  a  nation,  they  made 
for  themselves  a  lasting  place  in  history  by  their 
maintenance  of  a  pure  monotheism  ;  but  soon 
the  exodus  began,  and  we  find  them  scattered 
over  the  face  of  the  earth.  Semitic  is  their  great 
religious  genius,  which,  however,  contains  no 
propagandist  tendency,  and  finds  its  antithesis 
in  their  trading  instinct  developed  into  the 
wildest  passion.  This  outstanding  feature  of 
Jewish  character,  added  to  an  overweening  racial 
conceit  and  a  deadly  hatred  of  everything 
Christian,  explains  the  quite  unique  position 


THE  JEWS  IN  EUROPE  299 

which  Judaism  has  occupied  in  all  periods  of 
history.  In  plain  words,  the  Jews  have  always 
been  "  an  element  of  national  decomposition  " ; 
they  have  always  helped  in  the  disintegration  of 
nations.  Trade  recognizes  no  frontiers,  and  it 
is  not  necessary  to  demonstrate  how  one  group 
of  the  great  capitalists  of  Europe  are  formed 
in  an  international  association  to  promote  their 
own  interests  at  the  expense  of  their  smaller 
colleagues  and  the  landowners. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Jews  marry  so  strictly 
among  themselves  that  they  never  amalgamate 
with  an  alien  people.  In  history  they  appear 
to  belong  to  them  all,  but  in  spite  of  this  the 
majority  of  them  keep  their  innate  characteristics 
unimpaired,  and  wear  the  foreign  nationality 
like  a  garment.  Hence  the  well-known  fact 
that  the  only  art  in  which  the  modern  Jew  shows 
real  genius  is  the  art  of  the  theatre.  Imitative 
faculty,  without  any  inward  originating  power, 
has  always  been  a  strong  point  of  Jewish  litera- 
ture. Great  poet  as  Heine  was — and  he  was  one 
of  the  few  Jews  who  really  knew  the  German 
language — we  see  when  we  compare  him  with 
Goethe,  or  even  with  Chamisso  and  others,  how 
they  are  the  originators,  he  the  imitator. 

This  nation  whose  qualities  are  so  contra- 
dictory has  three  times  played  an  essential  role 
in  history.  Firstly,  in  the  Empire  of  Alexander 
the  Great,  when  Greek  genius  expanded  into 
Hellenism.  Then  the  Jews  were  not  only  the 
merchants  of  the  world,  but  they  were  also  the 
uniting  element  in  intellectual  life.  This  was  the 
time  when  Greek  culture  proper  was  falling  into 


300      RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

decay,  and  those  schools  of  philosophy  were 
arising  in  Alexandria,  whose  teaching  was  a  mix- 
ture of  Jewish  and  Greek  thought,  and  prepared 
the  way  for  the  great  Christian  idea.  Once  again 
did  the  Jews  play  a  like  part  in  the  Empire  of 
Rome.  Caesar  designedly  favoured  them,  and 
rightly  so,  for  he  ruled  the  world.  The  nations 
united  under  one  sway  must  cease  to  feel  them- 
selves nations,  and  for  this  end  no  means  could 
be  better  adapted  than  the  influence  of  the 
homeless  Jews.  Therefore,  here  again  they  took 
their  place  in  history.  Next  we  come  to  the 
time  when  the  young  States  of  the  Germans  began 
to  rise  upon  the  ruins  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
In  order  to  find  their  bearings  in  this  unfamiliar 
civilization  and  finance,  the  Germanic  farmers 
required  some  helpers  conversant  with  the  use 
of  a  currency.  In  the  early  Middle  Ages  the 
Jews  controlled  the  trade  of  the  world.  This 
explains  why  they  were  then  treated  with  so 
much  more  friendliness  than  was  the  case  later. 
Theodoric  the  Ostrogoth  could  not  dispense  with 
his  Jews,  and  long  after  his  day  Louis  the 
Debonnair  was  an  acknowledged  philo-Semite, 
although  even  so  he  was  unable  to  extricate 
himself  from  his  embarrassments. 

Presently,  however,  the  Jews  ceased  to  be 
indispensable,  for  the  Aryan  races  learnt  how 
to  manage  their  own  finance  themselves.  It 
then  became  apparent  what  a  dangerous  dis- 
integrating force  lurked  in  this  people  who  were 
able  to  assume  the  mask  of  any  other  nationality. 
Fair-minded  Jews  must  themselves  admit  that 
after  a  nation  has  become  conscious  of  its  own 


THE  JEWS  IN  EUROPE  301 

personality  there  is  no  place  left  for  the  cosmo- 
politanism of  the  Semites  ;  we  can  find  no  use 
for  an  international  Judaism  in  the  world  to-day. 
We  must  speak  plain] y  upon  this  point,  un- 
deterred by  the  abuse  "which  the  Jewish  press 
pours  upon  what  is  a  simple  historical  truth. 
It  is  indisputable  that  the  Jews  can  only  continue 
to  hold  a  place  if  they  will  make  up  their  minds 
to  become  Englishmen,  Frenchmen,  or  Germans, 
as  the  case  may  be,  and  provisionally  consent 
to  merge  their  old  memories  into  those  of  the 
nation  to  which  they  belong  politically.  This 
is  the  perfectly  just  and  reasonable  demand 
which  we  Western  races  must  make  of  them  ; 
no  people  can  concede  a  double  nationality  to 
the  Jews. 

The  considerations  in  this  matter  are  ex- 
tremely complicated,  because  we  have  no  certain 
standard  by  which  we  can  ascertain  the  extent 
to  which  the  Jews  have  spread  themselves  among 
the  alien  nationality.  Baptism  alone  is  no  guide. 
There  are  unbaptized  Jews  who  are  good  Germans 
— I  have  known  some  myself — and  there  are 
others  who  are  not,  although  they  have  been 
baptized ;  the  legal  aspect  of  the  question  is 
therefore  a  difficult  one.  If  legislation  were 
to  treat  the  Jews  simply  as  sojourners  in  the 
country,  allowing  them  to  ply  civil  trades,  but 
withholding  political  and  magisterial  rights,  it 
would  be  an  injustice  because  it  would  not  fulfil 
the  purpose  for  which  it  was  designed.  A 
baptized  Christian  cannot  be  legally  regarded  as 
a  Jew.  I  can  see  only  one  means  by  which  the 
end  can  be  attained,  and  that  is  to  arouse  an 


302     RACES,  TRIBES,  AND  NATIONS 

energy  of  national  pride,  so  real  that  it  becomes 
a  second  nature  to  repel  involuntarily  everything 
which  is  foreign  to  the  Germanic  nature.  This 
principle  must  be  carried  into  everything ;  it 
must  apply  to  our  visits  to  the  theatre  and  to 
the  music-hall  as  much  as  to  the  reading  of  the 
newspapers.  Whenever  he  finds  his  life  sullied 
by  the  filth  of  Judaism  the  German  must  turn 
from  it,  and  learn  to  speak  the  truth  boldly  about 
it.  The  party  of  compromise  must  bear  the 
blame  for  any  unsavoury  wave  of  anti-Semitism 
which  may  arise. 


IX 

CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

BY  Estates  we  mean  the  different  groups  of 
individuals  within  a  nation,  formed  by  similarity 
in  ways  of  living  and  the  resulting  community 
of  opinions,  manners,  and  conceptions  of 
"  honour."  Such  grouping  is  so  intimately  bound 
up  with  civil  society  that  we  may  say  that  the 
essence  of  society  is  subdivision.  Just  as  the 
State  cannot  survive  unless  divided  into  rulers 
on  the  one  hand  and  subjects  on  the  other,  neither 
can  society  unless  organized  into  various  classes. 
It  would,  however,  be  an  error  to  follow  Riehl 
when,  in  his  social  and  political  essays,  he  speaks 
of  class  distinctions  as  a  natural  growth,  and  of 
the  State  as  an  artificial  formation.  In  drawing 
this  contrast  he  is  right  in  one  point  only,  namely, 
that  the  State  seldom  has  any  creative  influence 
over  class.  It  may  destroy  it ;  an  existing 
aristocracy  may  be  annihilated  by  a  Revolution, 
but  can  never  be  created  by  the  State,  unless  its 
elements  are  previously  existent  in  society.  In 
America,  for  instance,  such  an  attempt  would  be 
an  absurdity.  Thus  it  is  clear  that  the  State's 
power  of  creating  class  distinctions  is  limited, 
although  it  can  undoubtedly  develop  those  which 

303 


304    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

are  already  there.  An  existing  upper  class  can 
be  so  fostered  by  the  State  that  its  dominion 
survives  longer  than  if  it  were  left  to  itself  and 
it  can  be  ruined  by  injudicious  State  interference 
in  the  same  way. 

Thus  if,  in  its  ordering  of  the  Constitution, 
the  State  is  to  make  use  of  the  class  organization 
which  it  finds  ready  to  hand,  it  must  stand 
superior  to  class  conflicts.  The  essence  of  class 
distinction  is  pre-eminently  that  spirit  of 
7r\eove%ia  which  we  have  recognized  in  all 
developments  of  society,  and  the  control  of  this 
dangerous  spirit  is  the  problem  which  all  rulers 
have  to  solve.  It  is  a  hard  one,  for  the  reason 
that  few  men  are  inwardly  free  from  class 
prejudice,  and  yet  without  this  freedom  the 
judgment  passed  upon  a  class  is  always  only 
"  e  vinculis  causam  dicere."  This  requires 
especial  emphasis  in  these  days,  when  it  has 
become  the  fashion  to  talk  as  if  the  middle  class 
were  without  this  universal  weakness.  They 
have  their  own  prejudices,  quite  as  much  as  the 
aristocracy  or  the  proletariat.  When  we  study 
the  history  of  the  German  nobility  we  find  that 
it  has  at  all  times  produced  many  men  of 
mark.  Its  long  roll  of  great  statesmen  and 
soldiers  is  known  to  every  one,  yet,  in  spite  of  this, 
there  is  a  middle-class  blindness  which  without 
more  ado  denies  the  gift  of  intelligence  to  every 
member  of  the  aristocracy,  and  privately  regards 
every  noble  as  a  person  who  puts  up  his  umbrella 
whenever  it  pleases  God  Almighty  to  rain  wisdom 
from  on  high.  All  human  history  contains  these 
prejudices  and  transgressions  of  classes  as  such. 


CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES    305 

It  is  one  long  record  of  the  deceits  of  priest- 
craft, of  the  arrogance  of  nobles,  of  the  pride 
of  purse  and  lack  of  culture  of  the  burgher,  of 
the  greed  and  coarseness  of  the  labouring  popu- 
lation. 

When  we  examine  the  divisions  within  the 
nations  known  to  history  we  come  first  of  all  to 
the  castes  of  the  Hindus,  which  take  their  origin 
from  ancient  racial  diversity.  The  Sanscrit  name 
for  caste,  "  Varna"  signifies  "  colour."  In  this 
case  the  vanquishers  seized  upon  the  highest 
caste  positions  over  the  vanquished ;  these 
divisions  are  hereditary,  and  can  never  be  over- 
stepped. By  Estates,  in  the  strict  meaning  of  the 
word,  we  understand  those  social  groups,  to  one 
of  which  every  individual  must  as  a  rule  belong, 
and  the  principle  is  carried  to  its  fullest  extent 
in  the  State  in  which  each  of  these  groups  lives 
under  its  own  laws.  Political  unity  is  then 
dissolved  into  a  number  of  class  associations. 
From  out  of  these  legally  sundered  groups  a 
freer  organization  of  classes  is  evolved,  no 
longer  divided  by  law,  from  which  by  good 
fortune  and  natural  gifts  an  individual  might 
rise  to  a  higher  or  fall  to  a  lower  status  in  society. 
The  boundaries  could  no  longer  be  legally  defined, 
and  shallow  thinkers  have  adopted  the  opinion 
that  class  divisions  have  ceased  to  exist. 

We  must  further  observe  how,  with  the 
development  of  national  economy,  and  its  in- 
creasing number  of  channels,  professional  classes 
have  arisen  alongside  of  those  original  divisions 
based  on  differences  of  birth.  Ancient  history 
only  affords  examples  of  these  latter,  modelled 

VOL.  i  x 


306    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

upon  the  pattern  of  caste,  which  goes  entirely 
by  birth.  The  class  system  of  old  times  seems 
somewhat  barren  and  monotonous  when  we 
contrast  it  with  the  rich  variety  of  modern  life. 
The  difference  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  many- 
sidedness  of  modern  national  economy,  as  well 
as  the  natural  configuration  of  Northern  Europe, 
has  brought  into  existence  a  multiplicity  of 
human  callings  which  were  unknown  to  antiquity. 
In  modern  history  numerous  professional  classes 
have  sprung  into  being,  which  have  gradually 
supplanted  the  old  divisions  of  birth.  This  is 
essentially  the  work  of  the  mediaeval  burgher 
class,  and  it  is  no  accident  which  has  caused  the 
word  "  burgher  "  (Burger)  gradually  to  become 
the  term  for  a  citizen  of  the  State.  Every 
language  uses  this  word  in  the  double  sense. 
This  cannot  be  a  coincidence  ;  it  is  true  that  a 
recollection  of  the  "  civitas  "  of  classical  antiquity 
may  have  had  an  effect,  but  it  has  not  been  the 
cause.  The  burgher  class  came  to  be  looked 
upon  as  the  normal,  out  of  which  many  other 
classes  grew.  So  the  class  distinctions  founded 
upon  birth  have  gradually  been  swallowed  up  by 
those  founded  upon  professions,  until  the  nobility 
is  the  only  one  of  the  former  which  survives. 
Hence  the  explanation  of  the  unique  position  of  the 
modern  noble  who  may  belong  to  any  profession. 
It  is  only  natural  that  this  anachronism  should 
raise  feelings  of  silent  ill-will  among  the  mass 
of  the  population.  The  development  of  European 
history  does,  in  fact,  show  how  the  old  closed 
system  of  birth  distinctions  has  been  outgrown, 
and  its  place  taken  by  the  professional  classes, 


CASTE  307 

with  all  the  variety  and  liberty  which  they  carry 
with  them. 

When  we  return  to  a  closer  examination  of 
the  ancient  castes  of  India  we  learn  that  they 
have  been  determined  by  nothing  less  than  a 
Divine  law,  which  the  individual  must  not 
venture  to  transgress  ;  a  doctrine  to  which  the 
Brahmins  have  added  the  further  refinement  of 
the  migration  of  souls.  According  to  this  theory 
the  miserable  existence  must  ever  begin  afresh, 
and  he  who  transgresses  the  rules  of  his  caste 
must  return  as  a  member  of  some  other  quite 
low  down  in  the  scale.  This  doctrine  was  like 
an  interdict  cutting  these  races  off  from  all 
liberty  or  independence,  and  the  Buddha  came 
to  them  as  a  saviour,  inasmuch  as  he  preached 
belief  in  a  veritable  death.  In  this  teaching  he 
presents  a  remarkable  contrast  to  Christ,  with 
whom  in  other  ways  he  has  so  many  points  in 
common.  The  Buddha  offered  release  and  salva- 
tion through  faith  in  a  real  death,  while  the 
Christian  religion  points  to  salvation  in  the 
Hereafter.  No  threat  of  punishment  after  death, 
however  terrible,  could  detach  the  Indian  from 
his  caste.  India  has  known  a  long  succession  of 
rulers  and  many  religions,  but  not  one  of  them 
has  broken  through  the  system  which  has  struck 
its  roots  so  deep  that  each  foreign  dominion  has 
only  added  one  more  caste  superior  to  those 
already  existing.  Thus  the  English  are  now 
the  governing  caste,  who  are  no  more  allowed  to 
mingle  with  the  others  than  the  others  may 
with  them.  The  white  man  has  to  conform  to 
the  rigid  rules  of  the  system.  Races  in  which 


308    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

the  classes  are  so  constructed  are  bound  to 
remain  stationary ;  the  narrowness  of  their 
outlook  forbids  their  attaining  more  than  a 
certain  degree  of  civilization.  We  have  seen 
how  it  is  the  ideal  of  the  law  of  inheritance  that 
the  will  of  past  generations  should  operate  in 
the  present.  It  should  do  so,  but  not  so  as  to 
cripple  completely  the  living  forces  of  that 
present.  This  is  what  happens  in  States  where 
caste  prevails. 

The  four  ancient  castes  of  India,  Brahmins, 
Kshatriyas,  Vaisyas,  and  Sudras,  find  their  uni- 
versal counterpart  among  Aryan  peoples  in  the 
priesthood,  the  military  aristocracy,  the  in- 
dustrial middle  class,  and  finally  a  labouring 
class,  which  may  be  wholly  or  partially  enslaved. 
Of  all  the  four  the  priesthood  has  had  the  most 
fluctuating  history.  With  the  Greeks  religion 
and  the  State  were  so  much  one  that  the  priests, 
as  a  class,  almost  disappeared,  and  were  finally 
merged  in  the  aristocracy.  In  the  case  of  the 
Christian  clergy  also  their  former  power  has  been 
so  much  curtailed,  that  the  Protestant  ministry 
at  all  events  has  simply  become  one  of  those  pro- 
fessions which  are  recruited  from  the  middle  class 
and  share  its  social  outlook. 

We  shall  treat  of  the  Priesthood  more  in 
detail  in  our  examination  of  the  Church,  and  will 
limit  ourselves  here  to  considering  the  other 
three  classes. 

By  origin  the  aristocracy  is  the  warrior  class.  It 
became,  with  the  further  development  of  civiliza- 
tion, the  political  class,  and,  as  such,  holds  the 
hereditary  privilege  of  leadership  in  the  State. 


THE  NOBILITY  309 

In  barbarous  nations  it  actually  bears  arms. 
It  was  Scharnhorst  who  first  recalled  us  to  the 
belief  that  this  is  an  aristocratic  privilege.  It 
was  a  terrible  failure  of  understanding  which 
made  the  nations  of  Europe  take  an  opposite 
view  in  the  days  of  mercenary  armies.  The 
hireling  troops  were,  as  a  whole,  despised,  and 
exemption  from  military  service  was  held  to 
be  the  privilege  of  the  educated  citizen.  The 
natural  view,  however,  is  that  to  bear  arms  is  a 
mark  of  nobility  and  distinction,  and  thus  it  is 
that  in  uncivilized  States  the  aristocracy  is  the 
military  class,  adding,  as  time  went  on,  other 
activities  of  a  more  peaceful  kind. 

The  word  "  Noble  "  (Add)  signifies  "  Race," 
and  the  conception  of  it  is  founded  upon 
a  belief  that  personal  characteristics  are  trans- 
mitted from  generation  to  generation.  This 
view  is  neither  absolutely  right  nor  absolutely 
wrong.  There  is  no  question  of  inheritance  of 
talent,  for  Nature  is  quite  incalculable  in  this 
respect,  and  every  day  we  come  across  instances 
of  the  most  ridiculous  inequalities  of  gifts  be- 
tween children  of  the  same  parents.  Bismarck's 
elder  brother  was  a  worthy  and  quite  undis- 
tinguished man  ;  if  he  had  been  the  younger 
it  might  have  seemed  that  the  great  Bismarck 
had  devoured  in  advance  all  the  intelligence  in 
the  family.  Furthermore,  we  find  that  in  the 
great  majority  of  cases  genius  and  talent  are 
transmitted  through  the  mother.  I  know  of 
no  instance  in  history  of  a  great  man  who  had  a 
stupid  mother,  but  there  are  many  whose  fathers 
were  in  no  way  remarkable.  Therefore  we  can- 


310         CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

not  talk  of  the  inheritance  of  talent  in  any  given 
family.  With  peculiarities  of  character  the  case 
is  different.  These  originate  more  from  the 
father,  and  are  transmitted  with  more  certainty  ; 
moreover,  character  is  not  merely  innate,  but 
can  be  acquired  by  association.  The  habit  of 
command,  and  of  viewing  things  from  above, 
will  come  more  easily  to  the  scion  of  a  great  house 
even  when  he  is  placed  in  mediocre  circumstances 
than  to  one  who  has  had  to  work  his  own  way  up. 
Thus  birth  is  of  importance  in  the  forming  of 
certain  characteristics,  particularly  those  which 
belong  to  leadership.  There  is  no  denying  the 
indestructible  truth  in  the  words  of  Horace  : 
"  Fortes  creantur  fortibus  et  bonis."  This  lies 
at  the  foundation  of  all  aristocracy. 

It  is  extraordinary,  however,  to  find  how 
complicated  and  varied  its  development  soon 
becomes.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  idea  of 
purity  of  blood  is  thrust  more  into  the  back- 
ground as  civilization  advances.  The  desire  for 
complete  equality  in  legislation  for  the  family 
is  well  founded  and  felt  by  all  civilized  nations, 
who  refuse  with  a  certain  quite  natural  repug- 
nance to  admit  the  notion  of  misalliances.  There- 
fore in  modern  times  the  nobility  can  only 
maintain  its  essential  character  by  means  of 
political  activity.  To  put  it  shortly,  there  is 
either  a  political  aristocracy  or  there  is  none. 
Nothing  but  ridicule  follows  upon  the  attempt 
to  regard  the  nobility  from  the  standpoint  of  a 
Court  Chamberlain. 

These  variations  in  the  outward  forms  of  the 
aristocratic  class  are  sometimes  absolutely 


THE  NOBILITY  311 

astonishing.     Roman  history  is  very  instructive 
in    this    respect.      The    old    contrast    between 
Patricians    and    Plebeians    gradually    vanished ; 
the  Connubium  and  the  right  of  holding  public 
office  was  accorded  to  the  latter,  but  no  sooner 
did  the  old  division  vanish  than  a  new  one  arose. 
The    class    of    the    "  optimates "    formed    itself 
from   the    old   Patricians   and   the   best   of  the 
Plebeian   families.     How   immensely   difficult   it 
was  for  an  "  homo  novus  "  to  gain  entrance  into 
it  we  can  judge  from  the  history  of  the  servile 
upstarts,   of  whom   Marcus   Tullius   Cicero  is  a 
type.     The  very  existence  of  this  body  of  servile 
opinion  shows  the  greatness  of  the  power  of  the 
"  optimates."     Here  then  we  have  a  quite  definite 
aristocratic  ruling  class  without  any  legal  bound- 
ary between  it  and  the  class  below,  and  it  was 
so    oppressive    that    Caesar    became    the     real 
liberator  of  Rome  by  becoming  the  champion  of 
democratic  monarchy  in  the  teeth  of  its  resistance. 
We  must  judge  the  historical  position  of  the 
nobility    in    the    different    countries    of   Europe 
with  open  eyes  in  order  not  to  regard   foreign 
institutions    with    blind    admiration.     Thus    do 
our  Conservatives  look  upon  the  English  aristo- 
cracy,  which   from    the   purely   social    point   of 
view  is  indeed  admirably  organized.     Only  the 
eldest  son  of  the  family  is  reckoned  as  belonging 
to  the   nobility ;    this  helps  to  keep  the   class 
wealthy,  and  thereby  removes  from  it  a  certain 
odium.     It    does    not    apparently    damage    its 
excellent  social  position  that  the  other  sons  sink 
back    into    the    ranks    of   the    commons.     Thus 
described,   the    organization    seems    very   good ; 


312    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

it  is  only  a  question  whether  we  Germans,  with 
our  widely  different  moral  and  social  outlook, 
could  adopt  it  in  its  entirety.  Frederick  William 
IV.  even  tried  it,  but  was  forced  to  revoke  the 
decree  after  a  couple  of  months  in  the  first  year 
of  the  reign  on  account  of  a  widespread  feeling 
against  it.  The  King's  fundamental  idea  was 
that  the  nobility  should  all  be  landowners ; 
only  those  who  inherited  land  should  be  ad- 
mitted to  their  ranks,  and  younger  sons  without 
landed  property  were  to  be  excluded.  With  us 
Germans,  however,  family  feeling  is  so  strong 
that  we  consider  it  an  injustice  for  the  younger 
son  to  hold  a  lower  social  position  than  the  elder, 
and  there  is  absolutely  no  argument  which  will 
alter  this  point  of  view.  It  is  not  true  that  the 
brother  who  possesses  an  estate  appears  so  much 
more  worthy  of  respect  in  the  eyes  of  our  middle- 
class  society  than  the  one  who  has  none.  To-day 
the  respect  for  landed  property  has  sunk  still 
lower,  since  so  many  of  the  great  estates  of  our 
nobility  have  fallen  into  obviously  unworthy 
hands. 

When  we  examine  the  many  different  forms 
which  aristocracies  have  assumed  in  the  history 
of  the  different  countries  we  can  say  that  the 
English  nobility  is  parliamentary;  while  the 
French  is  courtly,  and  perished  because  it  culti- 
vated this  quality  at  the  expense  of  its  political 
influence ;  the  German  was,  and  is,  monarchic 
and  military,  wherein  lies  its  strength ;  the 
Italian  is  urban.  In  England  the  real  "  nobility  " 
is  alone  recognized  in  law.  To  it  belong  the 
"  lords,"  the  hereditary  members  of  the  Upper 


THE  ENGLISH  NOBILITY  313 

House.  Below  it  is  another  social  grade,  as  little 
legally  defined  as  were  the  "  optimates,"  the 
class  of  the  "  gentry  "  whose  importance  cannot 
be  overrated.  They  are  the  real  support  of 
local  government  in  the  counties.  The  "  Lord- 
Lieutenants  "  are  very  rich  and  respected  terri- 
torial magnates,  whose  only  duty  is  the  giving  of 
large  dinners  from  time  to  time,  but  they  exercise 
great  indirect  influence. 

Formerly  the  great  majority  of  Justices  of 
the  Peace  were  drawn  from  amongst  these  large 
landowners,  and  the  self  -  government  of  the 
country  lay  in  their  hands,  but  nowadays  the 
position  of  these  magistrates  is  so  destroyed 
that  they  may  almost  be  discounted.  Official- 
dom has  taken  the  place  of  the  old  local 
government  by  the  aristocracy,  and  thereby  a 
blow  has  been  struck  at  the  root  of  the  power 
of  the  gentry.  Nevertheless,  as  the  English 
are  naturally  aristocratic,  it  is  probable  that  it 
will  continue  to  exist  under  the  new  forms. 
Parliament  is  composed  of  the  "  nobility,"  the 
possessors  of  the  only  recognized  titles,  and  the 
gentry  of  noble  descent,  who  are  the  actual 
rulers  of  the  State.  Latterly,  however,  customs 
have  altered  in  this  respect  also,  owing  to  the 
uprising  of  a  purely  democratic  element  in  the 
Lower  House,  which  may  produce  results  as  yet 
impossible  to  predict. 

England's  nobility,  then,  is  essentially  parlia- 
mentary. In  contrast  to  it  we  have  the  aristo- 
cracy of  France,  so  brilliant  in  its  beginnings 
when  it  was  the  model  of  gallantry  and  chivalry 
for  all  Europe,  gradually  sinking  lower,  and 


314   CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

deliberately  helped  by  the  monarchy  along  the 
downward  path.  Titles  could  be  bought  and 
two  ends  be  furthered  thereby  ;  one  the  enrich- 
ment of  the  Treasury,  the  other  the  subjection 
of  the  noble  class  itself,  which  became  less  and 
less  dangerous  to  the  Crown  the  more  its  numbers 
grew.  This  too  crafty  policy  overreached  itself. 
The  nobility  became  courtly  in  the  bad  sense  of 
the  word,  dissipated  their  energies  in  the  revels 
of  Versailles,  grasped  at  life's  pleasures,  and 
for  "  noblesse  oblige  "  substituted  "  noblesse  dis- 
pense." They  were  filled,  too,  with  an  arrogance 
of  caste,  which  forms  an  ugly  contrast  to  the 
barrenness  of  their  achievement. 

Then  came  the  terrible  catastrophe  of  the 
Revolution.  The  nobility  emigrated  and  took 
up  arms  against  their  fatherland.  There  is  no 
more  to  be  said ;  an  aristocracy  is  lost  which 
goes  to  a  foreign  country  to  fight  against  its 
native  land.  It  is  only  another  proof  of 
Napoleon's  insight  into  the  character  of  the 
French  people  that  he  never  ceased  to  gird 
against  the  emigres.  Since  that  time  the  power 
of  the  nobility  has  been  so  shattered  in  France 
that  its  patriarchal  form  of  existence  only  lingers 
on  in  a  few  of  the  western  provinces.  When 
we  see  what  the  nation  has  got  in  exchange  it 
is  difficult  to  say  whether  they  are  better  off 
with  the  Baron  de  Reinach  and  similar  delightful 
types  than  they  were  under  the  Montmorencys 
with  all  their  ill-deeds.  However  that  may  be, 
it  is  to  the  honour  of  the  French  that  they 
never  forgave  the  emigres.  In  this,  as  in  other 
things,  we  can  perceive  the  utterly  narrow  outlook 


THE  GERMAN  NOBILITY  315 

of  our  Radicals  when  they  imitate  French  ideas. 
The  French  had  good  reason  for  hating  their 
nobility  ;  in  Germany  it  is  exactly  the  other  way 
round,  for  who  is  there  who  can  deny  that  our 
Prussian  aristocracy  has  shed  its  blood  for  the 
Fatherland  upon  a  thousand  battlefields  ? 

When  we  look  into  the  matter  we  find  that 
in  Germany  also,  the  best  part  of  our  nobility 
are  political  in  the  highest  degree.  In  a  certain 
sense  we  are  bound  to  say  that  no  country  in 
the  world  has  a  more  illustrious  aristocracy  than 
our  own.  Since  we  became  an  Empire  our 
princes  have  belonged,  properly  speaking,  simply 
to  the  higher  ranks  of  the  nobility, — a  class 
which  need  shun  no  comparison.  Its  lower 
ranks  are  monarchically  inclined,  so  far  as  they 
count  for  anything.  The  Prussian  nobility 
occupy  so  high  a  moral  position  precisely 
because  the  much-abused  Prussian  Junker  con- 
stitutes the  best  element  in  the  whole  German 
aristocracy,  as  every  one  acknowledges  who  is 
acquainted  with  the  smaller  German  states. 
They  learned  long  ago  in  Prussia  how  to  be 
subjects,  and  how  to  seek  their  glory  in  the  service 
of  the  Crown.  Their  spirit  had  first  to  be  broken 
by  the  power  of  the  Monarchy ;  when  this  was 
once  done  they  submitted  themselves  to  it. 
The  petty  nobles  of  Saxony  and  Bavaria,  on  the 
other  hand,  have  always  been  somewhat  para- 
sitical ;  like  their  brethren  at  the  Court  of  France 
they  sought  to  raise  themselves  by  Court  favour. 

There  is  still  a  further  consideration.  The 
Catholic  nobility  of  the  south  and  west  ruled  the 
States  of  the  Church  in  Germany  for  centuries, 


316    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

and  divided  the  numerous  princely  coronets 
among  their  sons.  These  are  now  dispossessed, 
they  are  mediatized  and  dethroned,  and  cherish 
sentiments  with  regard  to  the  new  order  of  things 
which  in  many  ways  recalls  the  temper  of  the 
emigres.  It  is  not  quite  so  bad,  but  there  is 
something  in  it  of  the  same  enmity,  and  until 
that  is  overcome  this  section  will  stand  in  a 
doubtful  position  in  relation  to  the  whole  of 
national  life. 

It  is  exactly  the  old  families  among  the  minor 
nobility  who  have  the  blood  of  serfs  in  their 
veins,  for  the  original  German  nobility  either 
died  out  or  rose  to  princely  rank.  The  lesser 
families  have  almost  always  civil  servants  for 
their  fore-fathers.  These  were  unemancipated, 
but  by  reason  of  their  political  activity  they 
were  raised  above  the  mass  of  the  ordinary 
freemen,  so  that  they  gradually  became  superior 
to  them.  Many  good  noble  names,  such  as 
"Buttler,"  "  Truchsess,"  "  Schenk,"  stiU  betray 
this  origin.  A  similar  process  is  still  going  on. 
The  ranks  of  the  nobility  are  swelled  by  the 
accretions  from  middle -class  families,  who  have 
come  to  the  front  in  the  State's  service.  It  is 
quite  natural  that  this  should  be  so,  nor  is  there 
any  objection  to  it,  provided  always  that  it  is 
not  accompanied  by  arrogance  and  folly.  From 
out  of  the  aristocracy  there  is  evolved  in  process 
of  time  what  are  vaguely  called  the  ruling 
classes.  "  Optimates "  rise  to  eminence  who 
generally  have  a  share  in  the  civil  or  military 
government  of  the  State.  We  are  a  monarch- 
ically  constituted  people,  as  our  system  of  orders 


THE  NOBILITY  317 

and  titles  clearly  shows.  We  set  store  by  having 
a  position,  real  or  apparent,  in  the  framework  of 
the  State.  If  a  man  cannot  be  a  Regierungs- 
rath  he  desires  at  least  to  be  a  Commerzien- 
raih.  In  England  we  find  the  purely  aristo- 
cratic ambition,  with  us  it  takes  monarchic- 
bureaucratic  form.  Whatever  it  be,  some  kind 
of  tradition  is  necessary  in  the  guidance  of 
the  State.  Our  ruling  class  comes  of  good 
families,  who  bring  up  their  children  with  definite 
notions  of  what  is  honourable  and  what  is  not. 
A  stock  of  inherited  conceptions  of  integrity  and 
morality  is  a  necessity  for  Government,  which 
does  not  depend  primarily  upon  knowledge  but 
upon  capability  to  rule  ;  a  capability  inseparable 
from  self-control,  which  training  must  have 
made  into  a  second  nature. 

In  modern  times  the  status  of  the  lesser 
nobility  has  been  much  lowered  by  the  wholesale 
bestowal  of  titles,  so  that  only  the  minority  are 
owners  of  land.  A  number  of  very  deserving 
men  are  among  those  who  are  newly  ennobled; 
but  there  are,  unfortunately,  other  most  mis- 
chievous elements,  destructive  to  the  whole,  as 
for  instance  all  those  bankers  who  buy  their 
letters-patent  from  some  bankrupt  Prince.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  politically  active  minor 
nobility  is  still  an  important  factor  in  the  State, 
and  Prince  Bismarck  once  truly  remarked  that 
all  foreigners  envy  us  the  possession  of  it.  The 
modern  history  of  France  affords  an  absolutely 
terrifying  example  of  what  may  become  of  a 
country  without  a  nobility  in  the  political  sense. 
Can  the  Swiss  rejoice  in  sober  earnest  over  the 


318         CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

fact  that  their  old  and  famous  families  have 
disappeared  more  and  more,  and  their  places 
filled  by  railway  directors  ?  In  every  State 
there  must  be  one  class  which  is  actually  at  the 
top,  and  the  very  worst  for  that  position  is 
undoubtedly  the  aristocracy  of  the  purse. 

It  is  peculiar  to  the  Italian  nobility  to  have 
become  urbanized.  In  Piedmont  alone  do  we 
find  a  territorial  aristocracy,  of  valiant  fight- 
ing stock.  In  the  rest  of  the  peninsula  the 
nobility  are  town  dwellers.  The  development  of 
city  life  upon  the  soil  of  the  old  Roman  City  State 
was  so  vigorous  even  in  the  Middle  Ages  that  the 
nobles  migrated  to  the  towns.  Innumerable 
dukes  and  marquises  hold  municipal  office,  in 
Rome  it  is  the  rule  for  the  Mayor  to  be  a  Prince 
or  a  Duke.  The  aristocracy  have  accustomed 
themselves  to  a  town  life,  and  derive  from  it 
their  peculiar  position.  With  the  exception  of 
the  Piedmontese  they  have  no  military  distinc- 
tion, but  are  very  closely  bound  up  with  the 
civilization  of  the  country. 

Very  often  the  nobility  have  proved  them- 
selves a  protection  for  a  nationality  in  its  struggle 
with  other  nationalities.  Take  the  situation  of 
the  Saxons  in  Siebenbiirgen.  They  are  the  best 
of  the  Austrian  Germans  ;  it  is  a  pleasure  to 
associate  with  them.  They  have  the  great 
advantage  of  being  Protestant,  and  they  are  far 
more  intimately  linked  with  the  real  German 
life  than  are  the  Austrian  Catholics.  Their 
weakness  lies  in  this,  that  they  are  only  a  middle 
class,  worthy  farmers  and  citizens,  professors  and 
pastors,  they  lack  the  masses  with  their  fertility 


THE  NOBILITY  319 

below  them,  and  above  them  they  lack  the 
nobility.  Hungary  is  aristocratic,  and  the  Saxon 
counts  cannot  compete  with  its  great  territorial 
magnates. 

The  history  of  our  Polish  neighbours  shows 
us,  on  the  other  hand,  how  very  rarely  the 
nobility  can  control  the  Government  entirely. 
This  can  only  happen  in  such  city  states  as 
Genoa  or  Venice.  A  nation  of  knights  cannot 
exist,  at  least  not  in  this  hard-working  modern 
world.  Leaving  its  other  transgressions  out  of 
consideration  Poland  came  to  grief  because  it 
had  only  nobles  and  no  middle  class.  Its 
restoration  could  only  be  thinkable  if  a  real 
middle  class  were  to  arise  within  it,  for  otherwise 
a  healthy  and  vigorous  national  life  is  not 
possible. 

The  Turks  to-day  are  as  little  a  nation  in  the 
modern  sense  as  were  the  Poles.  In  itself  this 
people  is  not  aristocratically  organized.  Islam 
knows  no  class  distinctions,  but  in  contrasting 
themselves  with  the  common  herd  of  the  Giaour, 
the  Turks  compose  a  solid  little  aristocracy,  and 
will,  as  a  rule,  pursue  no  avocation  but  that  of 
the  soldier  or  the  priest.  For  this  reason  the 
retreat  of  the  Grand  Turk  across  the  Bosphorus 
is  only  a  question  of  time. 

The  despotic  nature  of  the  Russian  State  has 
given  its  nobility  very  singular  characteristics. 
Despotism  is  the  natural  enemy  of  all  aristocracy 
of  birth,  therefore  it  desires  to  establish  a  State- 
recognized  hierarchy  and  no  other,  as  has  been 
done  in  China  with  complete  success,  for  there 
the  State  acknowledges  only  those  divisions  of 


320    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

rank  which  it  has  itself  decreed.  So  it  is  in 
Russia.  The  whole  middle-class  population  is 
separated  into  an  order  of  ranks  created  by  the 
State.  An  aristocracy  of  birth  is  also  recognized, 
there  are  besides  a  few  Boyar  families  of  colossal 
wealth,  and,  in  addition,  a  crowd  of  newer 
nobility,  of  very  doubtful  origin,  who  have  worked 
their  way  up  by  Court  favour.  The  nobility 
of  birth,  however,  must  be  continually  employed 
in  the  service  of  the  State.  A  family  which  has 
not  held  office  in  the  State  for  two  generations 
loses  its  title  to  nobility.  Every  well-born  man 
in  Russia  has  his  name  put  down  as  attached  to 
some  administrative  department,  and  goes  there 
to  drum  on  the  window-pane  whenever  it  suits 
him.  There  is  no  real  nobility,  for  an  independent 
class,  founded  upon  birth  alone,  without  rank 
acquired  by  other  means,  is  not  recognized  by 
this  despotism,  in  which  adventurers  and  up- 
starts find  their  happy  hunting-ground.  Peters- 
.  burg  is  democratic  in  character,  there  is  no  place 
where  birth  counts  for  so  little,  but  it  is  an  equal 
servitude,  not  an  equal  freedom,  which  prevails 
there.  The  power  of  the  Czar  wields  its  un- 
limited sway  over  every  subject. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  middle  class,  the  so- 
called  Third  Estate,  upon  which  the  real  national 
strength  of  every  people  reposes.  We  may  say 
that  the  political  capacity  of  the  nation  is 
particularly  displayed  in  its  nobility,  but  that 
its  civilization  in  the  ideal  sense  is  as  a  rule  in- 
corporated in  its  middle  class,  and  the  bulk  of 
its  practical  work  as  well.  Upon  the  strength 
of  this  class,  then,  the  social  well-being  of  the 


THE  MIDDLE  CLASS  321 

nation  depends.  Literature  has  appertained  to 
it  at  all  times,  although  the  Russian  poets  form 
an  exception  ;  they  were  almost  all  aristocrats, 
because  no  real  middle  class  exists  in  Russia. 
A  truly  national  literature  must  spring  from  the 
heart  of  some  broad  group  of  the  people,  and  since 
culture  is  inseparable  from  literature  and  art, 
these  have  always  found  their  home  in  the 
middle  class.  No  one  can  place  much  artistic 
creation  to  the  credit  of  the  German  nobility, 
although  we  have  at  all  times  had  men  of 
learning,  poets,  and  artists  drawn  from  the 
aristocratic  class.  The  bourgeoisie  may  pride 
themselves  upon  their  long-standing  pre-eminence 
in  these  spheres,  and  further  in  that  economic 
activity,  which  is  indeed  directed  towards  gain, 
but  not  in  such  a  manner  as  to  absorb  the  whole 
of  a  man's  soul  and  strength. 

The  middle  class,  then,  is  a  valuable  possession 
for  every  nation.  Germany  may  truly  say  that 
her  own  is  relatively  the  soundest,  although  it 
is  self-centred  in  a  way  which  is  often  very 
harmful  politically.  It  is  all  too  easily  inclined 
to  believe  that  it  alone  constitutes  the  nation. 
Its  newspapers  usually  overlook  the  fact  that 
there  are  other  classes  and  higher  ranks.  They 
will  consider  no  opinions  but  their  own,  they 
believe  in  the  exclusive  power  of  the  forces 
intelligible  to  them  in  political  and  social  life, 
and  they  are  consequently  often  deceived  about 
the  ideas  which  are  really  circulating  among  the 
masses.  At  the  time  of  the  conflicts  over  the  Con- 
stitution, the  newspapers,  with  the  exception  of 
the  Kreuz-Zeitung  and  one  or  two  State  journals, 

VOL.  I  Y 


322         CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

all  agreed  in  declaring  that  the  people  were 
filled  with  dislike  of  the  King,  and  that  Revolu- 
tion stared  us  in  the  face.  Yet  this  was  a  glaring 
error,  and  the  journalists  failed  to  see  it  because 
they  only  thought  of  the  social  circles  to  which 
they  themselves  belonged.  The  mass  of  the 
population  was  quite  untouched  by  the  parlia- 
mentary struggles  of  that  year.  Thus  the  middle 
class  can  be  completely  mistaken  about  the 
temper  of  the  country.  Its  patricians,  like  those 
of  the  Netherlands,  cherish  a  deep  contempt 
for  Hodge. 

Their  virtues  are  best  displayed  when  they 
do  actually  stand  between  the  ruling  class  and 
the  masses,  "  o  /ieo-o?  /Jio?,"  as  their  great  ad- 
mirer Aristotle  called  them.  So  soon  as  they 
become  rulers  themselves  they  cease  to  be  the 
middle  class,  and  inevitably  they  begin  to  de- 
generate, as  we  see  from  the  example  of  France 
under  Louis  Philippe,  and  still  more  under  the 
present  Republic,  in  which  the  middle  class 
aristocracy  of  wealth  has  entirely  swamped  the 
old  aristocracy  of  birth. 

When  we  come  down  to  the  lowest  stratum 
of  society,  in  modern  parlance  the  Fourth  Estate, 
we  find  ourselves  confronted  with  a  remarkable 
phenomenon.  These  broad  masses  of  the  popula- 
tion contain  on  the  one  hand  the  worst  elements 
in  society — and  this  cannot  be  otherwise,  for  in 
every  well-ordered  community  there  must  be  an 
undermost  layer  which  contains  everything  that 
cannot  maintain  itself  on  a  higher  level — and 
yet  from  this  same  class  springs  the  rejuvenating 
and  revivifying  force  of  every  nation.  Every 


THE  FOURTH  ESTATE  323 

people  renews  itself  from  beneath  ;  the  worn- 
out  elements  sink  back,  the  new  young  ones 
rise  upwards  ;  hence  comes  the  tangled  inter- 
action of  class  upon  class.  No  one  knew  this 
better  than  that  great  man  Goethe,  whom  the 
narrow-minded  Liberals  persist  in  calling  an 
aristocrat.  If  true  democracy  consists  in  love 
of  humanity,  Goethe  was  a  democratic  poet 
indeed.  How  true  is  his  saying  that  "  those 
whom  we  call  the  lower  classes  are  surely  the 
highest  in  the  sight  of  God."  In  simple  con- 
ditions of  life  good  men  attain  to  a  na'ive  strength 
and  purity  of  sentiment  which  so  often  eludes  the 
culture  of  the  educated. 

Long  ago  Aristotle  denned  the  position  of 
this  class  within  the  State  in  words  essentially 
true,  though  tinged  with  the  hard-heartedness 
of  antiquity.  "  They  are  content,"  he  said, 
"  when  they  are  permitted  to  busy  themselves 
with  their  own  affairs."  To  win  their  bread  by 
the  sweat  of  their  brow  is  the  most  vital  interest 
of  these  labouring  masses.  They  strive  to  put 
themselves  in  a  tolerable  economic  position ; 
the  ideal  which  they  are  capable  of  shows  itself 
in  two  directions  :  a  deep  religious  feeling  and 
a  delight  in  warlike  heroism.  Who  can  think 
of  Jesus  or  of  Martin  Luther  as  other  than  the 
child  of  humble  parents  ?  Religious  genius  such 
as  this  is  only  to  be  found  among  the  lowly  born. 
The  aristocrat  must  do  violence  to  all  his  con- 
ceptions of  life  before  he  can  gain  the  conviction 
that  we  are  all  children  of  God,  but  it  will  be 
strongly  felt  by  the  meaner  folk  if  their  sentiment 
be  sound  and  healthy. 


324    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

The  common  man  possesses  also  a  sturdy, 
honourable,  warrior  spirit ;  the  joy  in  heroic 
deeds  runs  in  his  blood.  When  we  seek  for  the 
real  popular  heroes  in  history  we  find  that  the 
very  highest  meed  of  fame  of  which  tradition 
loves  to  tell  has  fallen  to  the  share  of  the  heroes 
of  war  and  of  religion.  Compared  with  them 
the  statesman  proper  will  never  be  popular. 
There  is  only  one  exception  to  this  rule,  and  that 
one  is  more  apparent  than  real.  It  is  Prince 
Bismarck.  But  he  lives  in  the  imagination  of 
the  people  as  a  soldier  hero,  as  the  iron  man  in 
the  yellow  collar  of  the  Magdeburg  Cuirassiers  ; 
the  fancy  of  the  populace  pictures  Moltke  and 
Bismarck  together  as  the  leaders  in  the  wars 
against  Austria  and  France.  Otherwise  it  is 
universal  that  the  leaders  of  war  and  religion  are 
the  only  really  popular  heroes,  and  that  know- 
ledge carries  with  it  the  key  to  the  treatment 
of  a  discontented  populace.  The  first  step  must 
be  to  appease  economic  anxieties,  the  second  to 
work  upon  the  oppressed  spirits  by  inspiring 
them  with  all  the  strength  of  hope  which  religion 
alone  can  offer.  The  manly  courage  and  religious 
sentiment  which  are  powerful  among  the  common 
people  must  be  fostered  and  inculcated  in  every 
possible  way.  For  this  end  a  national  army 
is  a  true  blessing.  Religion  is  to  no  one  more 
indispensable  than  to  the  low-born  man.  The 
educated  agnostic  is  aware  that  he  must  not 
transgress  the  moral  law,  but  the  uneducated 
will  lose  all  sense  of  morality  along  with  his  faith. 

Our  middle  classes  to-day  are  labouring  under 
a    widespread    and    absurd    delusion    that    the 


THE  FOURTH  ESTATE  325 

masses  can  be  helped  by  a  so-called  education, 
offered  to  them  in  the  shape  of  public  lectures. 
The  man  of  the  people  does  not  as  a  rule  possess 
either  the  leisure  or  the  freedom  of  mind  to 
assimilate  intellectually  the  totally  unsystematic 
and  disconnected  series  of  discourses  which  are 
put  before  him.  They  merely  teach  the  masses 
certain  phrases  and  catchwords,  which  they  repeat 
blindly  and  without  reflection,  only  half  under- 
standing them,  becoming  more  and  more  dis- 
contented the  more  they  take  on  the  semblance 
of  education. 

It  is  infinitely  more  important  to  promote 
the  economic  welfare  of  the  common  people. 
Their  sensitiveness  on  the  subject  of  every  legal 
inequality  among  men  and  the  pride  which  the 
humblest  among  them  feels  must  be  respected 
in  every  way  possible.  How  many  examples  in 
history  admonish  us  to  use  tender  and  con- 
siderate treatment  towards  the  lower  classes ; 
we  have  only  to  think  of  the  reckless  affronts 
heaped  upon  them  during  the  reign  of  Louis 
Philippe  by  the  French  bourgeoisie,  who  hated 
and  maltreated  the  people,  whom  they  looked 
upon  as  les  classes  dangereuses. 

It  is  an  arrogance  of  education  and  a  mis- 
understanding of  real  facts  to  regard  this  whole 
stratum  of  manual  workers  which  we  call  the 
Fourth  Estate  as  if  it  were  one  homogeneous 
mass.  It  falls  into  two  quite  different  categories, 
which  are  almost  opposed  to  each  other  in  feeling  : 
the  town  workers  and  the  country  population. 
It  is  one  of  the  greatest  tasks  of  the  social  re- 
former to  grasp  thoroughly  the  nature  of  the 


326    CASTES,  ESTATES,  CLASSES 

difference  between  these  two.  It  is  evident 
that  the  peasant  proprietor  belongs  to  the 
class,  even  if  he  owns  a  large  estate  ;  for  the 
test  is  manual  labour,  and  the  words  "  in  the 
sweat  of  thy  brow  shalt  thou  eat  bread  "  apply 
still  to  him.  He  still  feels  himself  directly 
dependent  upon  God  ;  no  calling  requires  the 
favour  of  Heaven  as  much  as  does  his  ;  and  this 
fact  strikes  the  keynote  of  the  sentiment  of  the 
agricultural  population.  As  a  rule  he  will  be 
conservative,  steadfast  to  the  tradition  and  faith 
of  his  fathers.  Peasant  risings  and  peasant  wars 
are  rare,  but  appalling  in  their  ferocity.  When 
slow,  stolid  natures  are  once  aroused  to  fury 
and  absolutely  carried  away  by  hate  and  anger 
they  know  no  mercy.  Their  normal  attitude, 
however,  is  that  of  a  fixed  attachment  to  the 
ancient  customs  transmitted  from  their  forbears. 
We  know  besides  that  a  healthy-minded  peasantry 
exhibit  class-pride  in  a  measure  quite  unknown 
to  the  professional  man  or  the  noble. 

In  contrast  to  them  we  have  the  mass  of  the 
town  workers,  inevitably  unrestful  from  the  very 
conditions  under  which  they  live.  These  con- 
ditions are  in  every  way  worse  than  those  of  the 
country  folk,  although  they  are  unaware  of  it 
themselves.  Like  other  countries,  Germany  is 
visited  by  that  rush  towards  the  great  cities 
which  was  the  ruin  of  the  Romans.  Once  there, 
the  labouring  man  falls  beneath  the  influence  of 
demagogues,  and  through  superficial  intercourse 
with  men  of  education  he  falls  a  prey  to  the  most 
dangerous  kind  of  semi-education.  A  nervous 
excitement  takes  hold  upon  him,  and  he  becomes 


RELIGION  327 

discontented  and  embittered  against  the  upper 
classes.  The  totally  unnatural  manner  of  life, 
the  material  conditions  so  unfavourable  in  the 
towns  in  comparison  with  the  country,  all  tend 
to  make  the  city  population  radical  in  feeling, 
and  our  modern  credit  conditions  are  such  as  to 
make  the  way  easy  for  revolutionary  ideas. 

True  as  all  this  is,  it  must  not  lead  us  to  any 
false  pride,  for  in  many  ways  the  simple  direct- 
ness of  the  lower  classes  reaches  more  nearly 
to  the  truth  than  do  the  opinions  of  their  social 
superiors. 


X 

RELIGION 

IT  now  remains  for  us  to  examine  the  great 
religious,  artistic,  and  economic  problems  which 
it  is  the  aim  of  human  society  to  solve,  and  to 
define  the  attitude  of  the  State  towards  these 
various  activities  of  civilization.  The  present 
chapter  will  deal  with  Religion. 

The  first  difficulties  in  the  relation  of  the 
State  towards  religion  arose  with  Christianity. 
The  antagonism  between  the  two  remained  veiled 
so  long  as  the  nations  of  antiquity  failed  to  com- 
prehend the  real  essence  of  religion.  Ancient 
religions  were  all  national,  a  fact  which  involved 
the  fusion  of  the  sacerdotal  and  the  kingly  office 
in  one  person.  At  the  same  time  the  States  of 
antiquity  do  reveal  faint  tendencies  towards 
a  separation  between  the  spiritual  and  the 
secular  power.  In  the  old  tradition  of  Calchas 
and  Agamemnon  we  seem  to  hear  the  first 
mutterings  of  hostility  between  Church  and 
State.  It  is  the  privilege  of  genius  to  discern 
the  future  dimly  across  the  barriers  of  the  present. 
Thus  Aristotle  says  most  characteristically  that 
the  priestly  offices  are  something  different,  which 
must  in  theory  be  placed  beside  the  political 

328 


CHURCH  AND  STATE  329 

offices.  This  "  erepov  n "  is  very  significant. 
He  has  the  vague  foreboding  that  priest  and 
archon  are  not  the  same,  but  he  fails  to  find  a 
clear  distinction. 

What  was  latent  in  the  antique  conception 
of  religion  inevitably  took  shape  when  with 
Christianity  an  independent,  and  predestinately 
universal  Church  arose.  From  then  onwards 
the  legal  and  political  relations  between  State  and 
Church  became  difficult.  For  us,  children  of  an 
age  which  has  partially  recovered  the  religious 
sense,  the  dry  rationalism  of  the  eighteenth 
century  can  no  longer  suffice.  Kant  defined 
religion  to  be  the  discernment  of  all  our  duties 
as  divine  commands.  On  closer  scrutiny  this 
saying  will  be  found  to  bear  the  stamp  of  that 
restricted  mentality  which  is,  after  all,  character- 
istic of  the  eighteenth  century.  Religion  is  not 
essentially  discernment.  Women  have  always 
been  more  inclined  to  piety  than  men,  without 
possessing  a  greater  degree  of  discernment. 
Preachers  who  use  reason  as  their  weapon  are 
condemned  to  failure.  Dull  sermons  may  deter 
clever  people,  they  may  destroy,  but  doctrine 
alone  can  never  build  up.  Schleiermacher  went 
far  deeper  than  Kant  when  he  said  that  the 
essence  of  religion  is  to  be  sought  in  the  creature's 
sense  of  dependance  upon  the  Creator.  This 
vaguer  but  wider  conception  of  religious  feeling 
touches  the  root  of  the  matter,  for  all  religion 
is,  in  fact,  something  mysterious  and  indefinable. 
Even  this,  however,  does  not  exhaust  the  content 
of  religion,  for  this  bare  sense  of  dependance 
reduces  it  to  something  servile.  To  it  must  be 


330  RELIGION 

added  the  no  less  essential  consciousness  of  our 
sonship  with  God,  and  our  relation  to  the  uni- 
versal whole  ;  the  knowledge  that  while  we  are 
dependent  upon  God,  yet  no  hair  of  our  head  can 
be  touched  against  His  will. 

When  we  envisage  things  thus  it  becomes 
clear  why  the  realm  of  religious  sentiment  must 
be  so  widely  severed  from  the  harsh  atmosphere 
of  political  life  that  no  complete  harmony  can 
ever  be  established  between  them.  Religious 
truths  are  truths  of  the  spirit,  more  real  than 
any  others  to  the  believer,  but  for  the  agnostic 
non-existent.  The  promises  of  religion  are  par- 
ticularly accessible  to  the  hopefulness  of  youth 
and  to  the  calm  contemplation  of  old  age,  while 
to  feminine  natures  the  gnawing  discontent  of 
a  life  without  these  comforts  is  insupportable. 
In  the  life  of  the  State,  however,  the  final  decision 
lies  with  the  men ;  they  are  the  rulers.  The 
State  is  not  governed  by  sentiment,  but  by  clear, 
calculating  knowledge  of  the  world.  Religion 
takes  account  only  of  what  it  believes,  the 
State  only  of  what  it  knows.  In  the  common- 
wealth of  the  Church,  the  subjective  conviction 
of  devout  consciences  is  all  that  counts.  The 
ideal  of  government  for  a  Church  is  a  republic. 
Its  constitution  must  be  such  that  the  changing 
convictions  of  its  members  can  find  expression, 
and  in  this  respect  also  the  Evangelical  Church 
has  the  advantage  over  the  Catholic. 

In  the  State  the  contrary  is  the  case.  It  re- 
presents power  first  and  foremost,  and  its  ideal 
is  incontestably  a  monarchy,  because  in  this 
form  of  government  the  power  of  the  State  is 


CHURCH  AND  STATE  331 

most  clearly  defined   and   finds   its   logical  ex- 
pression. 

In  every  Church  there  is  a  certain  tendency 
towards  fanaticism  and  intolerance,  since  each 
one  must  necessarily  believe  that  it  alone  points 
the  way  to  salvation.  Religious  faith  must  be 
positive  ;  there  is  no  more  a  natural  form  of 
belief  than  there  is  a  natural  language.  Pure 
abstraction  satisfies  the  religious  man  as  little 
as  it  does  the  artist ;  he  demands  the  most 
definite  embodiment  of  his  ideal ;  he  asks  for  a 
concrete  God  made  flesh,  for  means  of  salvation, 
and  for  a  revelation.  Only  as  exceptions  do 
we  find  really  pious  men  who  make  no  definite 
profession  of  faith, — such  as  Milton  or  Emanuel 
Geibel,  who  cried  out  in  complaint,  "  The  forms 
of  this  Church,  O  Lord,  no  longer  grasp  Thy 
mystery."  Luther's  intolerance  and  harshness 
towards  Zwingli  in  Marburg  has  done  much  harm 
to  the  Evangelical  Church,  and  decided  the 
cleavage  between  the  Lutheran  and  the  Reformed 
Churches,  which  lasted  for  centuries  and  counted 
for  so  much  in  our  history.  Yet  it  was  on  this 
very  account  that  Luther  in  Marburg  appears  as 
so  great  a  figure.  Place  him  beside  Melanchthon, 
and  it  is  clear  how,  although  Melanchthon  had 
the  freer  and  the  more  tolerant  spirit,  Luther 
was  the  greater  champion  of  the  faith.  In  articles 
of  faith  there  is  nothing  small  and  nothing  great 
for  the  spirit  of  man.  Therefore,  hand  in  hand 
with  religion  walks  fanaticism,  that  is  to  say, 
the  feeling  of  hatred  towards  the  adherents  of 
another  belief.  That  which  is  to  the  believer 
the  most  certain  subjective  truth,  to  the  un- 


332  RELIGION 

believer  is  delusion  and  deceit.  Hence  it  comes 
that  religious  conferences  have  never  led  to  an 
accommodation  ;  and  here  also  lies  the  explana- 
tion of  why  it  is  so  difficult  for  the  founder  of 
an  alien  religion,  like  Mohammed,  to  obtain  his 
due.  It  is  extremely  hard  to  make  a  devout 
woman  understand  that  this  great  historical 
personality  was  no  deceiver,  but  a  divinely  in- 
spired Prophet.  The  essence  of  faith  lies  in 
the  form  of  the  conviction  ;  it  is  possible  to  alter 
the  conviction  but  not  the  temperamental  atti- 
tude towards  it.  On  this  attitude  all  depends. 
Religion  is  a  matter  of  inward  experience,  its 
kingdom  is  among  the  deep  abysses  of  the  human 
heart. 

The  State  cannot  build  up  these  secret  forces 
of  the  soul,  but  it  can  disturb  them,  and  there- 
with the  series  of  conflicts  begin.  Every  religion 
strives  for  companionship,  it  hates  loneliness,  as 
Schleiermacher  says.  It  seeks  after  a  common 
worship,  common  means  of  salvation,  in  short, 
it  seeks  after  a  Church.  Therefore  every  re- 
ligious community  must  concern  itself  with  the 
world  of  will  in  its  exterior  manifestation  and 
with  the  world  of  law.  All  attempts  to  limit 
the  sphere  of  the  Church  by  appealing  to  the 
words,  "  My  Kingdom  is  not  of  this  world  "  are 
met  by  the  ever-recurring  interpretation  of  this 
profound  saying  :  "  non  est  hinc,  sed  est  hie." 
The  Church  is  not  of  earthly  origin,  but  she  does 
live  and  work  upon  earth.  Her  activities  must 
be  amongst  the  human  community  living  under 
the  reign  of  law,  and  as  she  takes  her  stand  upon 
principles  utterly  different  from  those  which 


STATE  AND  RELIGION  333 

govern  the  State,  it  is  evident  that  perfect  har- 
mony can  but  rarely  rule  their  relations.  We 
may  leave  it  to  pedants  to  quarrel  over  which 
of  the  two  morally  stands  higher.  Certain  it 
is  that  both  are  morally  necessary,  but  never- 
theless, politically  speaking,  the  Church,  like 
everything  else,  must  be  subject  to  the  State. 
Here  we  have  the  eternal  contradiction  of  two 
powers  with  an  equal  sense  of  sovereignty 
standing  in  perpetual  relation  of  supremacy  and 
subordination  to  one  another. 

Their  mutual  position,  then,  is  inherently 
irrational  and  difficult.  The  end  of  all  friction 
between  them  would  be  a  sign  of  the  stagnation 
of  one  or  the  other.  Problems  concerning  the 
marriage  law,  education,  and  the  oath  touch 
them  both  equally.  In  these  regions  rectification 
of  frontiers  must  often  be  required,  and  can  be 
undertaken  by  the  State  alone,  although  the 
Church  has  interests  which  must  be  carefully 
guarded.  Legally  speaking,  the  State  has  the 
jus  circa  sacra,  that  is  to  say,  the  supremacy  over 
the  Church  where  legal  questions  are  involved, 
whereas  the  Church  has  the  jus  in  sacra,  or  the 
definition  of  dogma  and  the  ordering  of  ritual, 
etc.  The  relations  between  the  two,  however, 
are  not  so  simple  as  they  would  here  appear. 
The  State  may  frequently  be  obliged  to  decide 
even  questions  of  dogma  ;  as  in  the  case  of  the 
old  Catholics,  who  believed  themselves  entitled 
to  reject  a  new  dogma,  although  the  first  prin- 
ciple of  Catholicism  is  submission  to  the  See  of 
Peter. 

We   are   here   face   to   face  with   one   of  the 


334  RELIGION 

most  complex  of  political  problems.  The  State 
can  and  must  ensure  freedom  for  conscience, 
but  it  must  exact  in  return  unconditional  obedi- 
ence to  its  laws.  It  is  not  permissible  for  any 
one  to  make  his  religious  convictions  a  reason 
for  disobeying  the  law  or  neglecting  his  duty  as 
a  subject.  A  State  decreeing  monogamy  must 
punish  Mormons  as  immoral  polygamists.  Simi- 
larly it  cannot  tolerate  the  resistance  of  the 
Mennonites  against  military  service  or  the  taking 
of  the  oath.  The  State  cannot  dispense  with  the 
oath,  inasmuch  as  faith  in  God  is  the  foundation 
of  legality.  From  the  standpoint  of  the  State, 
atheists,  strictly  speaking,  are  an  anomaly. 

A  nation  without  religion  has  never  existed, 
nor  ever  can  exist.  We  are  a  Christian  people, 
for  our  slight  admixture  of  Jews  counts  for  little. 
The  consciousness  of  national  unity  is  dependent 
upon  a  common  bond  of  religion,  for  religious 
sentiment  is  one  of  the  fundamental  forces  of 
the  human  character.  Jewish  pretensions  first 
tampered  with  this  truth  by  interchanging  the 
conceptions  of  religion  and  ritual.  Ritual  differ- 
ences may  indeed  be  endured  by  a  great  nation, 
although  with  difficulty — how  much  blood  has 
been  shed  for  their  sake  in  Germany  ! — but  the 
coexistence  of  several  religions  within  one  nation- 
ality, involving  an  irreconcilable  and  ultimately 
intolerable  difference  of  outlook  upon  life,  can 
only  be  a  transitional  phenomenon.  Spain  was 
not  a  nation  until  Christianity  had  conquered 
and  driven  the  adherents  of  another  faith  into 
a  corner.  Our  State  is  the  state  of  a  Christian 
people,  therefore  in  the  regulation  of  civil  life  it 


CHURCH  AND  STATE  335 

presupposes  the  Christian  Church  to  be  the 
Church  of  all. 

In  spite  of  this  it  is  unsafe  to  speak  of  a 
Christian  State,  for  the  State  is  by  definition 
secular,  and  must  be  just  to  all  its  citizens, 
regardless  of  creed  or  cult.  The  Constitution 
knows  nothing  of  an  established  Church,  and 
with  good  reason.  If  the  State  has  a  religion, 
and  sees  therein  a  proper  sphere  for  its  activities, 
it  can  never  be  just  to  dissenters.  To  label  a 
State  as  Christian  cannot  fail  to  lead  to  danger, 
since  it  encourages  the  belief  that  it  derives 
its  claim  from  the  Church.  If  for  no  other 
reason  this  designation  would  be  improper, 
because  a  universal  Christianity  has  given  place 
to  a  multiplicity  of  Christian  sects.  Consistency 
would  require  us  to  go  further,  and  demand  that 
the  State  should  adopt  a  dogmatic  faith. 

Yet,  for  all  this,  Church  and  State  are  most 
intimately  bound  together,  since  ultimately  both 
of  them  are  vehicles  of  education  for  the  human 
race.  The  whole  of  our  moral  civilization  in 
Germany  is  founded  upon  a  splendid  threefold 
thought.  There  is  the  early  Christian  Israeli tish 
idea  whose  keynote  is  self-negation ;  there  is 
also  the  moral  conception  of  antiquity,  with  its 
notions  of  self-assertion ;  and  thirdly,  there  is 
the  old  German  way  of  thinking,  which  unites  a 
strong  tendency  to  self-assertion  with  a  sensitive 
feeling  of  honour.  We  could  not  take  away  one 
of  these  three  elements  without  ceasing  to  be 
the  Germans  that  we  are.  Which  has  done  the 
most  for  the  future  of  the  German  race,  Boniface 
or  Charles  Martel  ? 


336  RELIGION 

In  order  to  ascertain  the  normal  relations 
between  Church  and  State  we  must  take  a  brief 
survey  of  the  legal  aspect  of  the  question.  We 
can  distinguish  three  kinds  of  association,  each 
of  which  stands  in  a  separate  position  with  regard 
to  the  State.  Firstly,  there  are  purely  private 
societies,  tacitly  permitted  by  the  State,  but 
lacking  legal  status.  No  association  or  company, 
as  such,  has  any  legal  personality  ;  if  it  incurs 
debt,  its  members  are  individually  liable.  Such 
a  society  may,  however,  obtain  from  the  State 
the  rights  of  a  legal  person.  It  is  then,  in  its 
collective  capacity,  able  to  own  property  and 
contract  debts,  but,  in  bestowing  these  rights,  the 
State  does  no  more  than  acknowledge  the  harm- 
lessness  of  the  society  in  question,  whose  assets 
it  considers  to  warrant  this  degree  of  recognition. 
Secondly,  there  are  corporations  which  the  State 
endows  with  privileges  because  their  moral  aims 
are  identical  with  its  own,  and  are  therefore 
regarded  by  it  as  indispensable.  A  State  founded 
upon  Christianity  must  regard  the  Church  as  a 
corporation  whose  tendency  bears  an  intrinsic 
affinity  to  its  own,  and  which  it  is  obliged  not 
only  to  recognize  but  to  favour.  In  return  for 
certain  privileges,  such  as  ensured  freedom  for 
public  worship,  endowments,  and  the  partial 
recognition  of  the  clergy  as  public  servants,  the 
State  is  bound  to  claim  a  right  of  supervision, 
which  it  may  never  abandon,  and  which  does 
not  originate  in  fear,  but  in  that  reverence 
which  is  due  to  the  Church  from  every  civilized 
State. 

We  can  discriminate  six  principal  forms  which 


CAESARO-PAPALISM  337 

the  relations  of  Church  and  State  have  assumed 
in  the  course  of  their  history. 

The  first  is  Caesaro-papalism.  Antiquity,  as 
we  know,  looked  upon  Church  and  State  as  one, 
and  it  was  inevitable  that  in  the  transitional 
period  the  Christian  Church  should  reflect  this 
conception.  Her  recognition  under  Constantine 
resulted  in  the  application  to  the  Church  of  the 
old  pagan  powers,  to  which  she  accommodated 
herself  with  consummate  worldly  art.  At  first 
the  Church  had  been  indifferent,  or  even  hostile 
to  the  State,  but  after  the  conversion  of  Constan- 
tine the  clergy  began  skilfully  to  adopt  the  forms 
of  the  Byzantine  bureaucracy,  and  borrowed 
an  order  of  precedence,  ever  since  known  to 
posterity  as  the  hierarchy.  This  was  the  genesis 
of  Caesaro-papalism,  which  denies  the  right  of 
independent  existence  to  the  Church,  but  claims 
its  complete  identity  with  the  secular  power. 
Its  early  manifestations  were  unlovely.  Con- 
stantine himself,  who  was  no  saint,  but  rather  a 
gross  sinner,  was  not  baptized  until  shortly  before 
his  death.  The  fundamental  dogmas  were  there- 
fore established  by  Councils  convened  and  ratified 
by  a  Pagan.  These  facts  should  not  be  passed 
over  in  silence  ;  it  should  be  made  a  subject  for 
admiration  that  Christianity  was  able  eventually 
to  recover  from  this  profanation  in  her  ecclesi- 
astical ordinances.  Once  elevated  to  the  rank  of 
a  State  religion,  the  Church  inevitably  meddled 
with  politics  and  the  State  with  doctrine,  both 
organisms  thus  betraying  their  own  essential 
principles.  The  blue  and  green  factions  in  the 
Circus  at  Constantinople  came  to  blows  over 
VOL.  i  z 


338  RELIGION 

the  question  of  whether  Christ's  humanity  was 
entirely  absorbed  by  His  divinity,  or  whether 
both  natures  in  Him,  although  perfectly  united 
in  one  person,  yet  remained  distinct.  The  notion 
that  it  was  the  State's  function  to  nominate  the 
gods  was  so  deeply  rooted  in  the  antique  world 
that  the  new  universal  Church  could  scarcely 
repudiate  it.  The  inherent  contradiction  in  these 
conditions  was  forcibly  smothered  by  the  com- 
plete unification  of  Church  and  State. 

To  most  Christian  peoples  the  heathen  idea 
of  making  the  secular  and  spiritual  spheres 
coincide  is  an  anachronism  which  has  been  long 
outlived.  To  the  pagan  East  religion  is  a 
command,  to  the  Christian  West  it  is  a  joyful 
message.  This  distinction  is  almost  universally 
accepted,  for  there  is  only  one  semi-oriental  State 
where  Caesaro-papalism  still  flourishes.  But  even 
in  Russia  the  tendencies  of  modern  Christian 
thought  have  made  it  necessary  to  recast  the  old 
system  of  Constantine  in  new  forms.  The  edu- 
cated Russian  will  not  even  admit  that  it  still 
exists.  I  once  spoke  on  this  subject  in  Heidelberg 
in  the  presence  of  a  distinguished  Russian  states- 
man. In  a  letter  to  a  French  newspaper  he 
declared  my  theme  to  be  based  on  German 
prejudice.  In  theory  the  Russian  Church  is 
indeed  subject  to  the  Holy  Synod,  which  is 
an  assembly  of  ecclesiastical  dignitaries  whose 
authority  is  nominally  independent  and  supreme. 
Amongst  them,  however,  sits  the  Imperial  Pro- 
curator, who,  in  the  words  of  Peter  the  Great, 
must  be  a  strong  man,  able  to  keep  the  priests 
in  order  ;  cavalry  generals  were  usually  preferred 


CHURCH  AND  STATE  339 

for  this  post.  To  all  outward  appearance  the 
only  function  of  this  Imperial  officer  is  a  general 
control,  but  any  one  familiar  with  Russian  con- 
ditions knows  that  nothing  is  done  without  his 
unqualified  approval. 

Thus  Caesaro-papalism  lingers  on,  chiefly  be- 
cause it  is  representative  of  Russian  modes  of 
thought.  The  popular  consciousness  fails  as  yet 
to  distinguish  spiritual  from  secular  things,  it 
weaves  them  into  one  fantastic  whole.  The 
passive  courage  of  the  Russian  in  the  face  of  death 
is  inspired  by  his  conviction  that  he  fights  always 
in  a  Holy  War  against  the  infidel.  He,  like  the 
Mohammedan,  sees  the  glories  of  Paradise  open- 
ing before  him  when  he  falls  in  combat  with  the 
unbeliever.  As  late  as  1848  we  may  read  in  an 
official  proclamation,  "  Oh,  ye  heathen,  submit 
yourselves  to  Holy  Russia."  We  must  not  be 
misled  by  this  false  peace  between  Church  and 
State,  devitalizing  to  both  by  leading  them  from 
their  true  vocation.  The  Russian  Church  says : 
we  define  no  more  dogmas,  therefore  we  can 
live  in  amity  with  the  State.  In  the  West  we 
decline  with  thanks  the  offices  of  a  Church  whose 
dogmatizing  days  are  done.  The  evolution  of 
doctrine  must  go  forward,  and  is  in  a  constant 
state  of  development,  even  in  the  Catholic 
Church. 

The  Catholic  Church  has  at  all  times  striven 
for  a  system  which  in  theory  is  contradictory 
enough :  the  subjection  of  the  State  to  the 
Church.  This  may  be  traced  back  through  the 
centuries  ultimately  to  St.  Augustine  and  his 
book,  De  civitate  Dei.  The  importance  of  this 


340  RELIGION 

magnificent  work  in  its  bearing  upon  the  mediaeval 
theory  of  the  Universe  has  not  even  yet  been 
sufficiently  recognized,  for  in  it  is  set  forth  for  the 
first  time  a  doctrine  which  has  been  the  ground- 
work of  all  canon  law  up  to  our  own  day.  Accord- 
ing to  it  the  Church,  for  the  believing  Christian, 
is  the  only  State.  The  secular  State  stands  along- 
side it,  but  it  is  a  kingdom  of  the  flesh  and  the 
devil,  and  can  only  justify  itself  in  the  eyes  of 
God  by  lending  the  support  of  its  powerful  arm 
to  the  true  State,  the  civitas  Dei.  The  Emperor 
is  the  advocatus  ecclesiae.  This  is  to  be  under- 
stood literally,  therefore  the  Church  remains 
mistress.  The  theory  was  further  amplified  in 
the  course  of  the  Middle  Ages  by  the  well- 
known  papal  doctrine  of  the  two  swords.  The 
State,  for  its  part,  attempted  to  exercise  a  certain 
supervision  over  the  Church  which  was  so  much 
dependent  upon  its  assistance,  but  it  was  only 
towards  the  end  of  the  Middle  Ages  that  a  State 
whose  organization  was  particularly  strong  suc- 
ceeded in  asserting  successfully  the  independence 
of  the  secular  ruler  from  the  Pope. 

The  intellectual  superiority  of  the  mediaeval 
Church  helped  to  maintain  its  position.  In  the 
Middle  Ages  the  State  was  not  the  principal 
vehicle  for  the  education  of  the  human  race,  for 
the  Church  took  over  those  tasks,  to  which  the 
State's  youthful  strength  was  not  yet  equal. 
The  mediaeval  State  was  often  incapable  even  of 
maintaining  the  public  peace,  and  the  Church 
would  be  called  in  as  a  mediator.  Again  and 
again  we  come  upon  the  words,  deo  regnante  rege 
exspectante,  in  proclamations  in  the  south  of 


CONCORDATS  341 

France,  long  after  the  descendants  of  Hugh 
Capet  were  seated  on  the  throne. 

At  that  time,  then,  the  superiority  of  the 
Church  over  the  State  was  neither  inconsequent 
nor  unnatural.  It  met,  however,  with  the  opposi- 
tion of  every  sound  secular  State.  There  was 
everywhere  an  instinctive  conviction  that  the 
State  must  be  sovereign,  and  the  Middle  Ages 
were  in  fact  a  period  of  perpetual  conflict  between 
the  pretensions  of  the  Church  and  the  impulse  of 
self-maintenance  in  the  State.  Then,  in  France 
under  Philippe  le  Bel,  the  State  stood  up  against 
the  claims  of  the  Pope,  and  denied  his  right  to 
interfere  in  the  kingdom's  affairs.  When  our 
Emperor  Louis  the  Bavarian  carried  on  the 
struggle  in  the  fourteenth  century,  the  Ghibelline 
writers  came  forward  to  prove  positively  that 
the  State  is  an  independent  organization,  being 
the  people  who  appoint  their  own  sovereign 
subject  to  the  approval  of  God.  In  the  freedom 
which  followed  upon  the  great  deed  of  Martin 
Luther  the  old  doctrine  was  broken  with  for  ever, 
and  not  in  the  Protestant  countries  only.  It 
would,  of  course,  be  impossible  to  make  a  Spaniard 
understand  that  Spain  owes  the  independence 
of  her  Crown  to  Luther.  Yet  it  was  he  who 
first  gave  utterance  to  the  great  thought  that  the 
State  is  in  itself  a  moral  organization,  which 
need  not  rely  upon  the  supporting  arm  of  the 
Church.  In  pointing  this  out  he  rendered  the 
greatest  of  all  his  political  services. 

All  attempts  made  by  the  Catholic  Church  to 
refute  this  principle  have  hitherto  been  fruitless, 
even  although  echoes  of  the  old  teaching  of  the 


342  RELIGION 

civitas  Dei  still  sound  through  modern  history 
down  to  our  own  time  in  the  immorality  of  the 
Concordat.  If  the  State  is  sovereign  it  can 
allow  no  other  body  which  is  subject  to  its 
supremacy  to  treat  with  it  regarding  the  limita- 
tions of  its  own  power.  It  may  accord  far- 
reaching  rights  to  a  Church,  but  must  remain 
the  arbiter  of  what  those  rights  shall  be.  A 
Concordat  is  a  treaty  of  one  power  with  another, 
but  the  State  must  not  permit  the  Pope  of  Rome 
to  meddle  with  its  authority.  It  must,  to 
borrow  a  phrase  first  employed  by  Bismarck  in 
a  less  serious  connection,  keep  its  hand  upon 
the  lever  of  legislation.  Further,  the  Curia 
cannot  avoid  deliberate  dishonesty  in  concluding 
such  compacts.  Both  parties  take  up  totally 
divergent  moral  standpoints.  No  special  blame 
should  be  imputed  to  the  good  old  man  now 
imprisoned  in  the  Vatican,  but  the  Roman 
Curia  must  be  by  its  very  nature  insincere. 
Since  the  Church  is  the  City  of  God,  the  Curia 
looks  upon  all  agreements  as  favours  or  con- 
cession which  the  Pope,  the  rightful  ruler  of  the 
world,  grants  by  way  of  exception  to  the  erring 
sons  of  men.  As  it  has  always  been  held  that 
such  concessions  and  favours  can  be  cancelled, 
it  is  useless  for  the  Ultramontane  Press  to  seek 
to  hide  that  a  State  which  allows  itself  to  be 
inveigled  into  a  Concordat  is  necessarily  the 
victim  of  duplicity  and  risks  being  forced  into 
a  position  from  which  it  can  only  withdraw  by 
subterfuge  or  equivocation.  Thus  when  Bavaria 
concluded  its  Concordat  with  the  Papacy  in  1817, 
the  Government  found  its  hands  tied  by  its  own 


A  STATE  CHURCH  343 

act.  This  position  very  soon  proved  intolerable 
and  aroused  the  instinct  of  self-preservation.  A 
religious  edict  of  contrary  tenor  was  drawn  up, 
and  published  as  an  appendix  to  the  Concordat. 

The  Austrian  Concordat  of  1855  shows  to 
what  lengths  the  Roman  Curia  will  proceed 
when  given  a  free  hand.  It  is  an  instance  of  the 
most  extreme  surrender  of  the  secular  authority 
to  Rome,  and  marks  the  climax  of  reaction.  By 
it  the  Bishops  were  exempted  from  the  civil 
jurisdiction  ;  they  took  their  oath  of  allegiance 
to  the  Emperor,  ut  decet  episcopum.  Even  the 
Universities  and  the  Press  were  placed  under 
episcopal  control.  How  could  it  be  possible  for 
the  modern  State  to  allow  such  interference  in 
its  own  proper  domain  ?  The  general  summary 
of  the  situation  is  that  the  normal  subordination 
of  the  State  to  the  Church  ceased  at  the  Reforma- 
tion. An  additional  reason  why  it  is  no  longer 
possible  is  the  variety  of  different  persuasions 
within  the  Christian  Church  to-day.  Where 
several  exist  side  by  side  the  State  cannot  adopt 
one  of  them  as  its  own. 

After  the  mediaeval  Church  had  procured 
the  acceptance  in  theory  of  its  world-empire, 
and  asserted  its  practical  supremacy  over  Western 
Europe,  the  resounding  act  of  Martin  Luther 
reawakened  the  inborn  impulse  of  self-defence 
in  the  secular  power.  State-supported  Churches 
were  everywhere  established,  which  at  first  sight 
bear  a  superficial  though  imperfect  resemblance 
to  the  Caesaro-papalism  of  Eastern  Europe. 
The  temporal  State  put  forward  no  claim  to  be 
deified,  but  became  aware  of  its  civilizing  mission 


344  RELIGION 

although  with  all  the  narrowness  characteristic 
of  new  movements.  This  claim  of  the  State 
was  thus  formulated  by  Melanchthon  ;  the  duty 
of  the  secular  sovereign  is  the  custodia  utriusque 
tabulae,  therefore  also  the  guardianship  of  the 
first  Table  of  the  Law,  which  contains  the  duty 
of  man  to  God.  To  preserve  and  uphold  this 
pure  doctrine  of  God  and  the  things  of  God  is 
one  of  the  fundamental  duties  of  authority. 

From  this  it  follows  that  the  sovereign  is  the 
head  of  the  Church,  and  must  himself  conform 
to  the  true  faith,  moreover  that  unity  of  belief 
is  the  natural  aim  of  all  political  life.  The  French 
summarized  these  principles  in  the  phrase,  une 
foi,  une  loi,  un  roi,  while  the  legal  maxim  in 
Germany  is  even  more  apt  :  cujus  regio,  ejus 
religio.  The  system  was  developed  in  England 
in  its  most  consistent,  and  also  its  most  un- 
attractive form.  At  first  the  spiritual  movement 
such  as  we  had  in  Germany  was  completely 
lacking ;  later,  when  it  really  came,  it  mani- 
fested itself  among  the  radical  sects,  the  so-called 
Dissenters.  The  real  force  of  Protestantism  lay 
with  them,  and  they  kept  it  through  the  centuries. 
It  was  the  Puritans  who  kept  England  from 
falling  back  into  the  old  system  once  more. 
Later  the  clergy  of  the  Church  fell  into  two 
divisions :  those  who  toiled,  and  those  who  held 
fat  livings.  All  the  higher  offices  fell  to  the  share 
of  the  sons  of  good  families,  while  the  minor 
clergy  had  no  prospect  of  attaining  to  these 
benefices.  To  every  other  of  the  abuses  here 
displayed  attendant  upon  a  State  Church  we 
must  add  the  crying  maltreatment  of  Ireland 


CHURCH  AND  STATE  345 

where  everything  was  sacrificed  for  money  and 
dominion,  and  one  injustice  heaped  upon  another, 
in  that  the  Irishman,  although  a  Catholic,  was 
forced  to  pay  tithe,  and  be  nominally  a  member 
of  the  Anglican  communion. 

In  like  manner  the  Church  in  France,  as 
developed  by  its  connection  with  the  State  after 
the  Reformation,  has  many  sins  upon  its  con- 
science. It  was,  as  we  know,  the  servility  of  the 
Gallican  clergy,  reduced  to  the  level  of  ecclesi- 
astical civil  servants,  which,  notwithstanding 
the  opposition  of  the  Pope,  brought  about  the 
expulsion  of  the  Huguenots.  The  consequences 
of  this  crime  are  still  clearly  to  be  seen.  The 
blind  admirers  of  the  French  Revolution  forget 
that  in  spite  of  it  Protestants  in  France  are 
still  not  allowed  churches  (eglises),  but  must 
call  their  places  of  worship  "temples"  ;  and  are 
regarded  by  the  law  as  idolaters.  In  Italy, 
the  first  paragraph  of  the  Constitution,  although 
practically  void,  enacts  that  the  Church  of  Rome 
shall  be  the  Church  of  the  State.  These  are 
proofs  of  how  deeply  the  Concordat  system 
has  struck  root  in  Europe.  The  first  Catholic 
Minister  in  Prussia  was  appointed  in  1848,  the 
first  Protestant  Minister  in  Bavaria  in  1847. 

The  presupposition  underlying  the  union  be- 
tween altar  and  throne  was  that  there  should 
be  practical  unanimity  of  belief  throughout  the 
country.  The  system  broke  down  as  soon  as  a 
variety  of  persuasions  arose,  counterbalancing 
each  other.  The  religious  treaties  of  Augsburg 
were  tolerated  in  Germany  because  the  country 
was  broken  up  into  Catholic  and  Protestant 


346  RELIGION 

territories  of  various  types,  and  it  was  possible 
to  move  from  one  to  the  other  at  will.  But  these 
liberties  did  not  suffice  to  avert  the  tumult  of 
the  Thirty  Years'  War.  The  Peace  of  Westphalia 
brought  some  improvement,  but  did  not  abolish 
the  divisions  between  the  Catholic  and  Protestant 
classes.  The  belief  of  a  particular  district  was 
held  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  its  reigning  family, 
and  therefore  the  old  principle  of  cujus  regio, 
ejus  religio  could  not  be  more  definitely  recognized 
than  in  the  Peace  of  Westphalia.  A  Protestant 
princely  House  was  a  member  of  the  corpus 
evangelicorum,  no  matter  what  creed  its  subjects 
professed. 

Prussia  was  providentially  placed  in  the  unique 
position  of  possessing  a  dynasty  which  adhered 
to  the  faith  of  a  small  minority.  Since  the  time 
of  John  Sigismund  the  Hohenzollerns  were 
followers  of  Calvin.  Prussia  had  broken  the  old 
tie  between  Church  and  State  long  before  the 
French  Revolution  attempted  to  do  so  ;  after- 
wards it  became  untenable  everywhere.  Since 
then  we  find  three  kinds  of  policy  with  regard  to 
the  Church  :  firstly,  to  treat  it  purely  as  a  private 
society ;  secondly,  to  admit  its  existence  side  by 
side  with  the  State ;  and  thirdly,  to  insist  on  the 
supremacy  of  the  State  in  matters  ecclesiastical. 

The  "  voluntary  system  "  of  America  treats 
the  Church  exactly  as  it  treats  every  chess-  or 
dancing- club.  In  the  law-courts  the  clergy  are 
on  the  same  level  as  a  railway  director;  the 
churches  are  places  of  public  assembly  merely  ; 
the  State  asks  for  no  rights  of  supervision  over 
them,  and  allows  them  to  exist  upon  the  same 


CHURCH  IN  AMERICA  347 

footing  as  other  private  associations.  This  is 
all  in  accordance  with  the  American  Constitution, 
under  which  the  State  is  more  a  free  association 
than  a  compelling  authority,  and  is  no  more  than 
consistent  in  regarding  the  Church  in  the  same 
light.  It  was  also  the  view  taken  by  the  radical 
English  sectarian  founders  of  the  Union.  The 
idea  was  in  the  air,  and  when  the  young  State 
came  into  being  its  powers  were  very  strictly 
limited.  Its  life  had  to  develop  through  countless 
voluntary  associations  and  assemblages  of  its 
citizens,  and  the  Church's  position  is  analogous. 
In  America  then,  the  voluntary  system  is 
possible,  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  beneficial.  In 
Europe  it  would  be  a  total  contradiction  of  all 
historical  tradition.  Here  we  have  a  test  of  the 
really  capable  politician,  who  does  not  read  his 
own  theories  into  history,  but  seeks  rather  to 
found  them  upon  actual  facts.  In  so  doing,  he 
would  see  that  our  ancient  Church  in  Europe 
could  never  be  treated  like  this  or-^that  club, 
and  that  any  attempt  to  humble  it  to  so  lowly 
a  position  would  work  havoc,  especially  with  the 
Church  of  Rome,  which  is  essentially  founded 
upon  visible  power.  In  America,  however,  this 
danger  has  been  pretty  well  guarded  against. 
Religious  zeal  is  there  one  of  the  few  idealistic 
influences  which  counterbalance  the  unresting 
instinct  of  commerce.  The  men  who  are  dollar- 
hunting  from  Monday  to  Saturday,  leading  a  life 
unworthy  of  a  human  being  for  six  days  on  end, 
keep  the  seventh  after  the  fashion  of  the  ghastly 
English  Sabbath,  as  a  day  of  completely  unin- 
telligent repose.  Thus,  we  see  the  Church  leading 


348  RELIGION 

a  life  of  unruffled  calm,  and  in  receipt  of  huge 
sums  of  money.  The  voluntary  system  is  here 
a  natural  growth,  and  the  American  habit  of 
forming  associations  is  so  all  -  pervading  that 
even  the  Roman  Church  has  accommodated 
itself  to  it,  for  the  Catholic  communities  are  in 
essence  autonomous,  only  holding  by  the  old 
Church  in  matters  of  dogma,  and  in  this  Rome 
has  been  wise  enough  to  acquiesce.  The  Pope 
has  the  gratification  of  seeing  his  Church  making 
gigantic  progress,  and,  despite  the  freedom  of 
its  constitution,  remaining  devoted  to  him  heart 
and  soul. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  find  in  America  re- 
ligious hatreds  and  jealousies  which  would  be 
absolutely  unbearable  to  us  Germans.  Innumer- 
able little  sects  squabble  with  one  another  over 
indefinable  dogmatic  subtleties.  In  Germany  we 
could  not  sever  the  sphere  of  religious  morality 
so  completely  from  our  working  life ;  such 
doctrinal  quarrels  would  shatter  our  national 
unity.  If,  for  instance,  the  Evangelical  Union 
were  dissolved  we  should  instantly  break  up 
into  countless  sects,  who  would  create  continual 
disturbance  of  the  public  peace.  In  spite  of 
much  declamation  on  the  subject  no  attempt 
has  yet  been  made  to  introduce  a  purely  voluntary 
system  on  any  large  scale  into  Europe. 

On  the  contrary,  a  system  of  dual  control  has 
lately  been  advocated  by  the  Ultramontanes 
under  the  title  of  ecclesiastical  liberty.  Of  this, 
Belgium  offers  us  a  terrifying  example.  Her 
Church  and  State  are  absolutely  co-ordinated, 
the  clergy  are  richly  endowed  from  ancient 


THE  CHURCH  IN  PRUSSIA          349 

Church  property  which  has  been  secularized, 
their  churches  are  recognized  as  places  of  public 
worship,  privileges  of  all  kinds  are  accorded  to 
them  in  civil  life,  and  yet  this  Church  is  not  called 
upon  to  submit  to  any  supervision  on  the  part 
of  the  State.  The  relationship  is  one  of  co-ordina- 
tion, which  it  is  easy  to  prove  wrong  in  its  very 
foundations,  for  in  accordance  with  the  principle 
of  no  rights  without  obligations  the  State  must, 
when  it  bestows  privileges  upon  the  Church,  re- 
serve the  power  of  calling  it  to  account  for  its 
stewardship.  Should  it  neglect  to  do  so,  the 
results  are  what  we  see  in  Belgium  to-day.  In 
this  country  of  a  most  ancient  civilization,  which 
boasted  a  thriving  weaving  industry  as  far  back 
as  in  the  days  of  Caesar,  more  than  50  per  cent 
of  the  population  can  no  longer  read  or  write, 
and  the  ignorance  of  the  people  increases  by  leaps 
and  bounds.  These  are  the  consequences  which 
follow  when  the  State  lacks  courage  to  exercise 
a  strong  supervision  over  the  Church ;  and  since 
there  is  in  Belgium  practically  only  one  creed, 
the  further  result  is  the  uncommonly  odious 
struggle  between  the  confessional  and  the 
masonic  lodges.  The  matter  in  dispute  is  the 
foundation  of  all  civilization,  for  it  is  the  question 
of  whether  the  ideas  of  the  thirteenth  century 
shall  prevail  over  those  of  the  nineteenth. 

The  explanation  of  the  whole  system  lies  in 
the  melancholy  history  of  Belgium.  The  country 
was  devastated  by  the  Spaniards,  after  the 
golden  age  of  its  free  cities,  and  then  two  centuries 
ensued  of  a  raging  conflict  between  the  priesthood 
and  the  Protestants  of  Holland.  The  unhealthi- 


350  RELIGION 

ness  of  party  life  in  Belgium  to-day  is  the 
consequence  of  the  existence  of  two  independent 
powers  within  the  State,  or,  in  other  words,  of 
the  higher  power  abdicating  its  superiority. 

Prussia  made  what  was  undoubtedly  one  of 
the  greatest  mistakes  in  her  history  when  she 
was  tempted  by  the  religious  toleration  which 
followed  the  year  1848  to  imitate  the  example 
of  Belgium,  at  any  rate  partially.  The  fathers 
of  our  Constitution  are  Benedict  Wai  deck,  a 
man  at  once  radical  and  ultramontane,  and  his 
great  following  of  Rhenish  jurists  with  Belgian 
sympathies,  who  were  Liberals  in  politics,  but 
in  ecclesiastical  matters  thoroughly  clerical  in 
their  views.  Among  many  other  plagiarisms 
from  the  Belgian  model  they  took  the  pre- 
posterously ambiguous  clause  which  laid  down 
that  jthe  churches  of  the  country  should  manage 
their  own  affairs.  The  dominion  of  the  Roman 
Church  over  the  Catholic  provinces  of  Prussia 
was  demanded  in  the  name  of  freedom,  and, 
sheltered  by  Frederick  William  the  Fourth's  strong 
Catholic  leanings,  a  systematic  violation  of  the 
law  began.  Even  as  there  were  many  Liberals 
who  pronounced  that  learning  should  be  free,  so 
did  the  clerical  party  contend  that  they  were  at 
liberty  to  organize  their  own  Church  without 
interference.  Nevertheless  this  clause  in  the 
Constitution  had  not  abrogated  the  Prussian 
provincial  law  and  other  enactments,  yet  in 
spite  of  them  one  cloister  was  founded  after 
another,  until  after  the  year  1870  the  State  was 
forced  to  revert  to  the  old  system  of  control 
which  had  subsisted  since  the  reign  of  the  Great 


THE  ROMAN  CHURCH  351 

Elector.  This  was  the  great  achievement  of  the 
May  Laws. 

Unfortunately  it  was  very  clumsily  and  in- 
considerately carried  out,  and  individual  cases 
were  unskilfully  handled  by  our  State,  which  has 
always  been  less  adroit  than  the  smaller  States  of 
South  Germany  in  its  dealings  with  the  Church 
of  Rome.  The  reason  lies  in  a  difference  of 
personality,  and  depends  in  great  measure  upon 
the  fact  that  our  administration  is  always  more 
Protestant  than  Catholic.  The  born  Catholics 
understand  the  practical  management  of  their 
own  priests,  they  know  how  to  apply  the 
reservatio  mentalis,  while  the  over-earnest  Pro- 
testant official  is  for  ever  striving  after  con- 
sistency in  his  dealings. 

Thus  Prussia  has  for  many  years  pursued  an 
unfortunate  policy  towards  the  Church  of  Rome, 
which  on  its  side  has  not  improved  matters  by 
detesting  Prussia  more  cordially  than  any  other 
State. 

In  spite  of  all  this,  however,  and  although 
unfortunately  only  tentatively  and  by  way  of 
experiment,  we  are  now  once  more  pursuing  the 
correct  policy  of  the  supremacy  of  the  State 
over  the  Church.  Its  principle  is  that  the  jus 
in  sacra  lies  in  the  power  of  the  Church,  while 
the  supremacy,  the  jus  circa  sacra,  is  the  pre- 
rogative of  the  State.  It  may  be  called  the 
German  system,  as  it  is  in  full  operation  in 
Germany,  and,  to  an  extent,  in  Switzerland  also. 
It  affords  complete  freedom  for  the  individual 
conscience,  but  the  Church  receives  privileges 
as  a  corporation,  and  is  therefore  to  that  extent 


352  RELIGION 

brought  into  subjection  by  the  State  which 
supervises  and  decrees  its  legal  status  in  civil 
society.  These  measures  are  not  dictated  by 
fear  of  the  Church  but  by  reverence  for  it,  for 
through  them  the  State  acknowledges  an  inward 
kinship  with  it,  and  recognizes  its  aims  as  con- 
genial to  its  own. 

Difficulties  arise  in  the  working  of  this  system 
when  it  is  applied  to  the  Catholic  Church,  which 
considers  itself  a  Church  politically  as  well  as 
ecclesiastically,  and  acts  upon  the  principle  of 
extra  ecdesiam  nulla  salus,  whereas  the  Protestant 
confessions  regard  constitutional  questions  as 
of  secondary  importance  ;  they  take  their  stand 
upon  the  Bible  saying,  "  Where  two  or  three  are 
gathered  together  in  My  name,  there  am  I  in 
the  midst  of  them."  The  importance  attached 
to  >the  hierarchy  by  the  Roman  Church  greatly 
increases  the  difficulties  of  her  relations  with  the 
State,  and  besides  this,  she  poisons  public  life 
by  unscrupulous  use  of  demagogic  methods. 
Just  as  the  Curia  in  the  Middle  Ages  controlled 
the  mendicant  Orders,  and  utilized  them  for  its 
own  ends,  so  at  the  present  day  it  exploits 
parochial  journalism.  The  Church  of  Rome  has 
learnt  with  masterly  ability  how  to  forge  its 
sharpest  weapon  against  the  State  out  of  uni- 
versal suffrage,  and  the  liberty  of  the  Press,  which 
once  it  reviled  and  resisted. 

The  experience  of  Joseph  II.  teaches  us  that 
the  State  must  not  meddle  with  ritual  or  dogma, 
but  even  this  axiom  cannot  be  put  into  practice 
without  grave  difficulty.  Ritual  and  dogma  are 
liable  to  modification,  even  in  the  Church  of 


CHURCH  PROPERTY.     WORSHIP     353 

Rome,  so  that  doctrinal  dissensions  will  always 
recur.  What  course  should  the  State  pursue  ? 
It  must  concern  itself  primarily  with  externals, 
and  with  the  question  of  whether  the  modification 
of  dogma  has  taken  place  according  to  the 
prescribed  method.  This  point  arose  at  the  last 
Vatican  Council.  It  is  untrue  to  say  that  the 
Old  Catholics  are  the  repositories  of  tradition, 
which  has  undoubtedly  remained  with  the  Roman 
Catholics.  The  delusions  of  Dollinger  should 
not  be  trusted  as  evidence  that  the  proceedings 
of  this  Council  were  more  discreditable  than 
those  of  the  old  Synods  of  early  times,  for  these 
new  dogmas  were  admitted  only  after  technically 
valid  voting.  What  more  does  Rome  want  ? 
It  recks  nothing  of  conscience  or  conviction,  but 
only  demands  obedience.  Dollinger  was  always 
able  to  construct  for  himself  a  learned  vision  of 
the  Church  which  was  founded  on  theory  and 
not  on  fact.  Consequently  he  was  always  at 
loggerheads  with  Rome  ;  he  cried  "  Pater  pec- 
cavi"  but  for  intellectual  men  there  is  a  limit 
to  such  repentance.  The  Roman  Catholic  Church 
has  always  maintained  the  old  teaching  of  sub- 
mission to  Pope  and  Council,  and  to  me  as  a 
Protestant  it  is  a  matter  of  perfect  indifference 
whether  one  old  gentleman  is  called  infallible 
or  four  hundred  old  gentlemen.  Had  Dollinger 
been  consistent  he  would  have  become  a  Pro- 
testant. 

In  all  these  matters  Falk  was  incredibly 
misled ;  the  foolish  plan  was  adhered  to  of 
treating  a  handful  of  Dissenters  as  though  they 
were  the  Catholic  body.  On  this  principle  the 

VOL.  i  2  A 


354  RELIGION 

beautiful  church  in  Wiesbaden  was  handed  over 
to  the  small  minority  of  Old  Catholics,  while  the 
real  Catholics  built  themselves  a  wooden  Church 
next  door,  which  was  overcrowded  every  Sunday. 
This  shows  that  the  State  must  never  pronounce 
on  theology. 

The  most  difficult  questions  arise  for  the 
State  out  of  transformations  of  dogma.  Since  it, 
as  a  rule,  provides  or  guarantees  the  stipends  of 
the  clergy,  it  may  have  to  decide  whether  an 
ecclesiastic  is  to  lose  his  benefice  because  he 
refuses  to  follow  a  change  of  dogma.  Moreover 
it  is  important  to  remember  that  Church  property 
legally  belongs  to  the  parish,  and  not,  as  the 
Ultramontanes  would  have  it,  to  the  Church  as 
a  whole.  Therefore  if  it  should  happen  that  a 
whole  parish  were  to  secede  from  the  Church, 
it  would  not  be  the  duty  of  the  State  to  arbitrate 
but  to  acquiesce. 

Worship  must  be  carried  on  in  the  buildings 
dedicated  to  it.  If  it  attempts  to  court  publicity 
it  must  be  prepared  for  a  rebuff  from  the 
authorities,  for  the  State  can  only  tolerate 
religious  processions  in  public  when  the  circum- 
stances of  the  moment  make  them  inoffensive. 
Catholic  processions  in  ultra-Protestant  towns 
can  only  be  a  challenge  to  the  public  peace, 
and  Napoleon,  with  ready  insight,  forbade  them 
wherever  there  was  a  Protestant  "temple."  His 
well-known  decree,  forbidding  pilgrimages  on  a 
large  scale  as  unseemly,  also  has  a  certain 
justification.  When  hundreds  of  individuals  of 
both  sexes  spend  the  night  together  in  the  open 
excesses  are  scarcely  to  be  avoided. 


RELIGIOUS  ORDERS  355 

The  State  must  not  permit  Church  discipline 
to  take  the  form  of  imprisonment  or  corporal 
punishment,  with  the  exception  of  Houses  of 
Correction  for  clergy  who  have  been  guilty  of 
some  offence.  The  Church  inflicts  its  own 
penalties  for  many  transgressions  which  are 
condemned  by  the  secular  law,  but  the  State 
cannot  allow  this  in  cases  which  it  has  itself 
acquitted.  Neither  can  it  now  countenance  the 
greater  excommunication,  which  involves  the 
breaking  off  of  civil  intercourse  with  the  ex- 
communicated person. 

The  education  of  the  clergy  is  a  matter  which 
properly  concerns  the  Church,  but  the  State 
must  supervise  it,  if  only  for  the  reason  that  it 
provides  the  greater  part  of  the  wherewithal  by 
instituting  the  theological  Faculties.  Training 
for  the  priesthood  must  not  be  permitted  to 
begin  in  boyhood.  Even  the  bigot  Philip  II. 
was  an  opponent  of  the  seminaries  for  boys 
which  arose  after  the  Council  of  Trent.  On  the 
other  hand  the  alarm  which  led  to  the  suppression 
of  the  theological  Con  victoria  was  exaggerated. 
We  need  not  suppose  that  a  Catholic  seminarist 
is  any  more  free  than  he  was  under  the  Con- 
victoria  ;  he  remains  as  much  under  the  control 
of  his  superiors,  and  has  no  opportunity  of 
choosing  his  own  studies.  The  State  cannot 
exercise  a  direct  influence  over  the  interior  life 
of  the  Church  any  more  than  over  the  domains 
of  art  and  science,  for  the  test  of  examinations 
does  not  help  it  much  ;  it  is  so  easy  to  cram  the 
required  amount  of  knowledge  without  inwardly 
digesting  it. 


356  RELIGION 

The  State  must  keep  a  particularly  watchful 
eye  upon  the  religious  Orders.  Since  it  guarantees 
personal  freedom  for  all  its  citizens,  it  may  on 
no  account  permit  any  one  of  them  to  surrender 
his  whole  life  to  servitude  by  any  sacred  vow. 
No  one  can  deny  that  a  monk  is  a  slave  in  body 
as  well  as  in  spirit,  and  therefore  those  teachers 
of  Constitutional  Law  who  carry  the  principle  to 
extremes,  lay  down  that  all  vows  upon  entrance 
to  a  cloister  or  an  Order  should  be  abolished. 
This  is  going  too  far,  but  the  State  should  always 
remember  that  it  only  tolerates  the  existence  of 
such  Orders  by  way  of  exception,  and  that  those 
of  them  which  transgress  the  civil  law,  such  as 
the  begging  Orders  or  the  secret  Orders  like  the 
Jesuits,  should  on  the  face  of  it  be  forbidden. 
Others  which  occupy  themselves  with  doing 
good,  like  the  Sisters  of  Charity,  may  be  more 
mildly  treated ;  they  are  too  busy  relieving 
misery  to  find  time  for  the  lust  of  power.  More- 
over the  feminine  spirit  often  feels  the  imperious 
necessity  to  seclude  itself  in  an  ideal  communion 
with  God.  It  is  otherwise  in  the  case  of  monks. 
We  must  remark  at  this  point  that  the  sturdy 
German  nature  feels  less  drawn  than  any  towards 
the  monastic  life.  The  cloisters  had  their  high 
place  in  history  while  they  were  centres  of 
civilization  and  learning  amid  the  rough  and 
tumble  of  a  newly  settled  land,  but  the  days  of 
monkery  were  already  ended  when  the  Reforma- 
tion came  ;  the  sins  of  those  fat  paunches,  their 
gluttony  and  tipsy  ways,  their  laxity  and  lazi- 
ness, were  as  well  known  as  the  narrowness 
and  ignorance  of  their  minds.  It  would  be 


CHURCH  AND  EDUCATION          357 

difficult  to  find  a  necessity  for  their  existence 
to-day. 

The  State  cannot  afford  to  surrender  its 
share  in  the  patronage  of  the  highest  offices  of 
the  Church.  The  episcopal  function  comprises 
the  whole  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  hence  the 
inevitable  demand  of  all  European  Governments 
for  a  voice  in  the  appointment  of  bishops. 
Catholic  princes  make  their  own  nominations, 
after  consultation  with  the  Curia,  but  the  Pope 
has  never  yet  made  this  concession  to  Protestant 
rulers.  In  this  connection  the  State  must  par- 
ticularly be  on  its  guard  against  the  list  system. 
It  is  to  the  undying  honour  of  Barthold  Niebuhr 
that  he  preserved  Prussia  from  this  dangerous 
method  of  selection.  In  any  case  the  State  must 
reserve  to  itself  the  right  to  confirm  the  choice  of 
the  Chapter,  and  must  furthermore  demand  the 
right  to  eliminate  from  the  list  of  candidates 
the  personae  minus  gratae. 

A  further  point  to  which  the  State  must  direct 
its  attention  is  the  administration  of  Church 
property.  It  must  be  watchful  that  it  is  only 
used  for  ecclesiastical  purposes,  and  also  it  must 
limit  the  extent  of  mortmain.  The  necessity  for 
this  has  been  perceived  even  in  America.  As  the 
dispenser  of  justice  the  State  must  ensure  that 
ecclesiastical  property  is  equitably  divided  on 
the  breaking  up  of  communities,  a  task  which  is 
often  difficult  and  can  only  be  settled  on  the 
merits  of  each  separate  case.  If  a  whole  com- 
munity forsakes  one  faith  for  another  it  takes 
its  property  with  it.  It  is  important  to  re- 
member that  death-bed  bequests  to  ecclesiastical 


358  RELIGION 

bodies  are  null  and  void.  The  extortion-scandals, 
where  the  terrors  of  Hell  were  exploited  to  so 
much  profit  by  the  priesthood,  cannot  be  too 
sternly  repressed  by  the  State. 

The  State  may  of  course  allow  the  Church 
to  impose  a  Church  Tax,  on  condition  that  it  is 
only  levied  from  members  of  its  flock.  It  is  an 
injustice  that  the  Silesian  Protestants  under 
Austrian  rule  should  pay  towards  the  upkeep 
of  the  Catholic  Church,  and,  conversely,  that  the 
Irish  Catholics  should  be  mulcted  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Church  of  England. 

Another  important  question,  very  difficult  to 
decide,  is  how  far  the  State  can  or  should  respect 
the  preferences  of  the  Church  in  matters  of 
education.  At  the  Reformation  the  temporal 
power  took  over  not  only  the  property  of  the 
Church  but  also  her  civilizing  mission.  The 
modern  State  has  created  the  National  schools, 
and  thereby  given  proof  that  it  is  better  able  to 
deal  with  these  problems  than  the  Church.  No 
more  than  a  measure  of  co-operation  can  be 
conceded  to  the  latter,  since  the  State  assumed 
direct  control  of  education.  The  normal  con- 
ditions in  parishes  of  unmixed  faith  will  be  that 
the  clergyman  is  a  member  of  the  School  Board, 
but  here  again  each  case  must  be  judged  in- 
dividually. The  newspapers  revel  in  ambiguities 
over  this  question  of  religious  education  ;  they 
see  no  alternative  between  religious  schools  and 
schools  from  which  religion  is  altogether  banished. 
It  is  totally  forgotten  that  the  Prussian  Provincial 
Law,  which  also  applies  to  the  new  Provinces, 
enacts  that  religious  instruction  should  be  im- 


CHURCH  AND  STATE  359 

parted  in  accordance  with  the  doctrine  of  a 
given  persuasion,  and  other  subjects  are  to  be  so 
taught  as  not  to  disturb  religious  peace.  It 
follows  from  this  that  religious  instruction  in 
the  National  Schools  is  both  compulsory  and 
denominational.  Heaven  preserve  us  from  the 
fashionable  vapourings  of  the  present  day,  which 
would  fain  prevent  Protestant  children  from 
hearing  of  the  glorious  deeds  of  Luther,  and 
would  suppress  all  open  and  honest  mention  of 
Jesus  Christ  out  of  consideration  for  a  few  Jews. 

It  must  be  admitted  that  in  parishes  where 
no  persuasion  has  enough  following  to  maintain 
its  own  school,  the  only  solution  of  the  difficulty 
is  concurrent  teaching  of  different  religions  in 
the  same  building.  Experience  shows,  however, 
that  under  these  conditions  the  religious  in- 
struction is  less  adequate  than  in  denominational 
schools  ;  it  is  often  contended  that  mixed  schools 
promote  religious  harmony,  but  in  actual  fact 
they  are  nurseries  of  sectarian  hatred. 

Schools,  then,  must  remain  secular,  while  the 
religious  teaching  they  impart  must  be  denomi- 
national. Every  father  has  the  right  to  have 
his  children  instructed  in  the  religious  creed  of 
his  own  choice,  but  he  is  not  entitled  to  allow 
them  to  grow  up  without  any  religion  at  all. 
When  an  adult  declares  himself  to  be  no  longer 
a  member  of  any  Church,  the  State  which  does 
not  interfere  with  private  conscience  must 
acquiesce,  but  it  does  not  do  so  in  the  case  of 
children  below  the  age  of  reason. 

From  this  the  delicate  question  arises  of 
whether  the  State  may  require  that  even  a  child 


360  RELIGION 

of  tender  years  should  be  made  a  member  of 
a  definite  persuasion.  Compulsory  baptism  has 
something  so  repulsive  about  it  that  the  Church 
does  not  seek  to  enforce  it  by  the  help  of  the 
State.  No  doubt  the  unbaptized  child,  when  it 
receives  religious  instruction,  must  become  aware 
that  it  is  not,  strictly  speaking,  a  Christian. 
When  the  Radicals  of  Bale  claimed  the  right  to 
be  confirmed  without  having  been  christened, 
they  were  talking  sheer  nonsense,  for  Confirma- 
tion is  nothing  but  a  reaffirmation  of  the  baptismal 
vows. 

Finally  it  still  remains  for  the  State  to  establish 
the  proper  procedure  for  the  deposition  of 
ecclesiastics,  in  as  far  as  the  matter  concerns  it. 
It  must  set  up  for  this  purpose  an  especial  Court 
of  Judicature,  but  it  was  a  mistake  of  the  May 
Laws  to  make  this  Court  a  tribunal  selected  for 
that  purpose  only,  thus  incurring  the  resentment 
of  the  Church  from  the  very  beginning,  especially  as 
partizan  spirit  dictated  the  choice  of  its  members. 

It  would  have  been  wiser  to  have  chosen 
the  Supreme  Court  (Oberverwaltungsgericht),  as 
in  France  it  is  the  Council  of  State,  as  the  final 
Court  of  Appeal. 

Conflicts  between  State  and  Church  will  never 
cease,  because  these  two  great  moral  forces  of 
mankind  move  upon  contentious  ground,  and 
also  because  the  education  of  our  time  is  essenti- 
ally secular.  Our  theological  Faculty  at  the 
present  day,  taken  by  itself,  has  not  so  much 
intellectual  capacity  as  all  the  other  Faculties 
taken  together.  Theologians  must  endeavour 
to  keep  pace  with  the  researches  of  science, 


RELIGION  361 

although  they  may  ignore  the  empty  fancies 
of  idle  dreamers.  The  two  Churches  of  Christen- 
dom stand  once  more  in  marked  opposition  to 
one  another,  but,  in  the  worldly  sphere  at  least, 
a  reconciliation  does  seem  possible  between 
them.  Here,  above  all,  the  victorious  march  of 
Protestantism  stands  out  in  the  realm  of  science. 
We  can  safely  say  that  in  Germany  every  culti- 
vated Catholic  has  received  a  certain  amount 
of  Protestant  education.  The  achievements  of 
Catholics  have  only  been  great  in  music  and 
painting  ;  we  find  that  the  great  men  of  learning 
have  been  Protestants  almost  without  exception. 
Broadly  speaking,  Protestantism  is  the  form 
of  Christianity  suited  to  Germany;  the  educated 
German  Catholic  stands  nearer  to  his  Protestant 
compatriot  in  his  religious  conceptions  than  he 
does  to  his  Spanish  or  South  American  co- 
religionist. The  Latin  races  are  irresistibly  drawn 
towards  the  Roman  Catholic  conception  of  Chris- 
tianity by  the  innate  turn  of  their  minds,  by 
their  hierarchical  instinct,  and  by  the  southern 
craving  after  beauty.  In  their  hands  the  con- 
stitution of  the  Romish  Church  will  degenerate 
more  and  more  ;  the  salvation  of  Protestantism, 
on  the  other  hand,  lies  in  the  breadth  of  its 
sympathies.  We  have  to  thank  the  freedom 
and  mildness  of  its  rule  for  the  system  of  our 
established  Church,  which  is  German  out  and 
out.  That  the  bond  between  its  various  per- 
suasions should  be  an  enduring  one  is  for  it  a 
vital  question,  and  one  upon  which  the  Hohen- 
zollerns  have  exercised  a  great  influence,  and 
finally  consummated  in  the  Union. 


XI 
NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

THIS  theme,  the  education  of  the  nation  in 
science  and  art,  and  the  attitude  of  the  State 
with  regard  to  it,  arouses  nowadays  the  gloomiest 
reflections,  for  the  stupid  self-sufficiency,  which 
is  almost  the  only  failing  of  our  present  century, 
shows  itself  here  in  its  ugliest  light.  Above  all 
else  it  is  clear  that  the  State  has  little  creative 
power  over  intellectual  life,  but  is  limited  to  pro- 
tecting it  and  offering  superficial  assistance.  Wise 
statesmen  of  the  past  have  always  recognized 
this.  We  might  take  as  a  motto  for  a  really 
comprehending  appreciation  of  national  educa- 
tion the  well-known  saying  of  William  Humboldt 
concerning  the  establishment  of  the  Berlin  Uni- 
versity :  "  We  merely  appoint  competent  men 
and  let  them  gradually  fire  the  train."  The 
image  is  a  striking  one,  and  to  the  point.  All 
depends  upon  finding  the  men  in  whom  the  living 
spirit  of  learning  throbs.  It  is  true  that  the 
palatial  gymnasia  of  to-day  are  more  magnifi- 
cently built  than  were  those  old  boxes  in  which 
we  used  to  receive  our  education,  but  then  we 
learnt  Greek  and  Latin  thoroughly,  an  accom- 
plishment now  attained  by  few.  Therefore  we 

362 


ANTIQUITY  AND  MIDDLE  AGES     363 

must  remember  that  although  the  State  by  its 
action  can  start  and  encourage,  it  cannot  create. 
It  is  the  same  with  art.  If  we  try,  as  was  tried 
in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  in 
the  name  of  the  State,  to  instil  a  fixed  and 
definite  style  into  art,  the  result  is  only  wooden 
and  lifeless. 

The  second  important  point  to  be  considered 
in  the  position  of  the  State  towards  national 
education  is  that  the  Church  on  the  one  hand  and 
the  home  upon  the  other  have  an  equal  right  to 
claim  a  hearing.  The  history  of  education  has 
always  been  closely  bound  up  with  the  position 
which  the  Church  and  the  family  have  held  in 
the  State.  In  the  East  the  teaching  of  the  people 
has  always  lain  in  the  hands  of  the  priests. 
Among  the  Greeks,  where  the  life  of  the  people 
and  the  life  of  the  State  were  one,  State  education 
was  in  Sparta  a  fundamental  principle,  carried 
to  its  logical  conclusion.  Plato,  who  came  of  a 
good  family  and  was  revolted  by  the  ill-breeding 
of  the  Athenian  democracy,  exalted  the  crude 
Spartan  State  as  an  ideal ;  his  Republic  is 
an  adaptation  of  the  Spartan  system,  in  which 
the  children  only  remain  in  the  care  of  their 
parents  until  their  seventh  year,  and  are  then 
entrusted  to  the  State.  In  the  more  polished, 
fuller  life  of  Athens,  on  the  other  hand,  we  see 
the  development  of  a  more  private  education  ; 
individual  teachers  make  their  appearance  and 
are  supported  by  the  richer  citizens.  This  was 
still  more  the  case  in  Rome,  where  the  family 
held  an  independent  position.  Here  the  State 
controlled  no  educational  Institutes,  except  the 


364  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

great  slave  schools  founded  by  the  Emperors. 
The  slaves  trained  in  them  found  a  position 
as  pedagogues  in  noble  families,  or  served  the 
State  in  some  minor  capacity.  The  Roman 
State  left  what  remained  to  be  done  to  the 
discretion  of  the  great  families  themselves,  and 
concerned  itself  not  at  all  about  the  mental 
upbringing  of  the  mass  of  the  people.  There 
gradually  grew  up  that  culture,  cosmopolitan 
on  the  one  hand  and  exclusively  social  upon 
the  other,  through  which  the  Romans  lost  their 
national  attitude  towards  the  world. 

The  position  which  the  Church  held  in  the 
Middle  Ages  made  it  of  necessity  the  vehicle 
for  all  popular  education.  The  change  came 
with  the  Reformation,  when  the  modern  State 
shook  off  leading-strings,  attained  the  conscious- 
ness of  itself,  and  took  over  from  the  Church  its 
civilizing  mission.  Luther  declared  that  it  was 
the  right  and  the  duty  of  the  State  and  the  secular 
communities  to  take  charge  of  popular  education. 
Study  of  the  development  of  national  schools 
makes  it  impossible  to  deny  that  the  modern 
State  has  performed  its  duty  towards  them  far 
better  than  the  mediaeval  Church  ever  did. 
There  was  no  question  of  providing  them  for 
the  masses  in  the  Middle  Ages.  The  sons  of  the 
better  classes,  or  the  more  intelligent  among  the 
children  of  the  poor,  were  placed  in  the  monastery 
schools  to  be  trained  for  the  priesthood,  but  the 
common  people  remained  without  any  instruction 
whatever. 

With  the  Reformation  there  began  a  rivalry 
of  all  Governments  in  their  care  for  popular 


RELIGIOUS  INSTRUCTION  365 

education.  The  Universities  ceased  to  be  ecclesi- 
astical, the  old  learning  based  upon  authority 
was  discarded,  and  the  great  secularization  of 
our  culture  began.  Right  into  the  seventeenth 
century  theologians  were  still  bound  to  the  letter 
of  Holy  Scripture,  as  philosophers  were  to  Aris- 
totle, and  physicians  to  the  alleged  writings  of 
Hippocrates  and  Galen. 

Meanwhile,  however,  the  mighty  inward  libera- 
tion of  science  was  coming  to  pass,  and  it  was 
officially  recognized  that  its  very  essence  con- 
sisted of  innovation  and  research.  Then  the 
universal  emulation  in  the  fostering  of  educational 
institutions  began.  The  elementary  schools  were 
the  last  to  feel  its  influence,  and  in  this  the 
Protestant  countries,  especially  Holland  and 
Germany,  led  the  van.  Nowadays  we  draw  a 
distinction  between  elementary  education,  the 
secondary  education  of  the  Gymnasia  and  the 
Realschule,  and  the  higher  walks  of  learning 
which  we  pursue  at  our  Universities. 

When  we  examine  first  of  all  elementary 
education,  we  find  that  the  ancient  Church, 
when  she  ceased  to  be  universal,  lost  the  power 
of  training  youth  in  a  fair-minded  manner. 
She  can  no  longer  stir  the  German  spirit.  That 
being  so,  the  time  has  come  to  apply  the  enact- 
ments of  our  Provincial  Law  to  which  we  owe 
the  State-ownership  of  the  schools,  and  no 
smooth-tongued  hypocrisies  must  be  permitted 
to  bring  about  a  reaction  which  shall  replace 
our  schools  under  the  Church  whose  power  of 
guiding  them  has  vanished. 

Pious    people   are   here   apt   to   confuse   two 


366  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

issues.  It  is  self-evident  that  the  first  stages 
of  elementary  education  must  centre  round  re- 
ligious instruction  ;  that  village  schools  should 
usually  be  denominational  arises  from  the  fact 
that  they  generally  have  only  one  schoolmaster. 
It  is  equally  obvious  that  the  lessons  in  Bible 
and  Catechism  must  be  impressed  upon  the 
children  by  exercises  in  reading  and  writing. 
Thus  the  whole  system  hangs  together :  the  re- 
ligious and  secular  instruction  complete  each 
other.  It  is  clear,  however,  that  as  children  are 
not  able  to  distinguish  shades  of  truth  or  false- 
hood, but  only  know  black  from  white  and  good 
from  bad,  it  is  right  and  proper  that  a  school 
should  be  of  one  faith.  Controversy  enters  even 
into  those  elements  of  so-called  universal  history 
which  can  be  taught  at  this  early  stage.  The 
children  must  hear  about  Martin  Luther  and  our 
old  Fritz ;  already  we  have  come  upon  a  wide 
divergence  in  the  instruction  which  the  two 
creeds  would  give  upon  these  points.  Therefore 
schools  where  the  teaching  is  mixed  must  only 
be  founded  where  means  will  not  suffice  for 
the  maintenance  of  two ;  we  know  by  old 
experience  that  they  are  disturbers  rather  than 
promoters  of  religious  peace.  To  hope  to  smooth 
inward  contradictions  by  an  outward  amalgama- 
tion is  an  old  mistake,  made  also  by  the  en- 
lightenment of  the  eighteenth  century.  It  applies 
equally  to  mixed  marriages,  as  any  dweller  in 
the  Rhenish  Provinces  knows.  They  simply 
afford  a  convenient  opportunity  for  the  priests 
to  gain  a  footing  in  the  home  and  sow  the  seeds 
of  discord  there.  It  is,  however,  too  much  to 


ELEMENTARY  SCHOOLS  367 

ask  of  Catholic  parents  in  a  country  district  to 
put  their  confidence  in  an  Evangelical  school- 
master, and  it  is  also  evident  that  an  elementary 
teacher  will  arouse  opposition  more  readily  than 
a  man  of  higher  education.  A  certain  amount 
of  higher  culture  is  required  before  a  man  can 
be  broad-minded,  for  it  is  only  after  we  have 
examined  the  foundations  of  our  own  faith  that 
we  can  subjectively  appraise  and  honour  the 
faith  of  others. 

The  point  to  uphold  is  that  the  elementary 
schools  must  give  a  positive  education,  which 
must  all  be  grounded  upon  religion.  Therefore 
the  normal  should  undoubtedly  be  unity,  not 
mixture  of  creeds.  But  this  is  not  to  say  that 
mixed  schools  are  always  to  be  condemned. 
They  are  necessary  in  the  Polish  Provinces  as 
a  protection  for  Teutonism.  There  German  cul- 
ture must  be  aided  to  gain  the  upper  hand, 
but  in  Poland  and  West  Prussia  a  Catholic 
school  means  a  Polish  school.  Dissenters  from 
this  view  are  sacrificing  the  real  and  great  interest 
of  the  German  nation  for  love  of  an  abstract 
theory. 

We  find  in  our  study  of  elementary  education 
that  every  period  demands  certain  accomplish- 
ments which  are  a  necessary  part  of  the  equip- 
ment of  every  man  in  that  age.  In  primitive 
times  it  was  skill  in  arms.  Therefore  it  was 
ridiculous  when,  in  the  romantic  period  of  our 
literature,  poets  laid  so  much  emphasis  upon  the 
bravery  of  the  Middle  Ages.  It  would  be  the 
same  if  we  were  to  make  a  great  boast  of  the 
universal  mastery  of  the  art  of  reading  and 


368  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

writing  in  the  present  day.  Trade  and  commerce 
and  the  conditions  of  our  intercourse  have  made 
it  impossible  for  any  one  to  pursue  a  civil  calling 
without  the  three  R's.  The  State  could  not 
carry  on  its  own  business  if  it  could  not  reckon 
upon  its  citizens  possessing  this  amount  of 
knowledge.  This  said,  the  value  of  this  marvel- 
lous attainment  is  exhausted ;  to  call  it  culture 
is  a  modern  inaccuracy,  as  silly  as  it  is  to  talk 
as  if  the  village  schoolmasters  of  Germany  had 
won  the  battle  of  Koniggratz. 

Since  elementary  knowledge  is  indispensable 
nowadays,  both  in  commercial  and  everyday 
life,  the  State  must  enforce  it  by  the  whole- 
some discipline  of  compulsory  education.  Here 
again  Prussia  was  the  pioneer.  The  Reforma- 
tion confined  its  attention  almost  entirely  to 
secondary  education  ;  Melanchthon's  services  in 
this  sphere  earned  for  him  the  title  of  praeceptor 
Germaniae.  Elementary  schools  were  hardly 
known  at  that  time  ;  they  were  first  introduced 
on  any  considerable  scale  in  the  United  Nether- 
lands, although  attendance  was  not  made  com- 
pulsory. It  is  to  the  undying  honour  of  that 
gifted  pedant,  Frederick  William  I.  of  Prussia, 
that  he  was  the  first  to  introduce  this  measure 
throughout  his  dominions.  In  Gotha  and  Bruns- 
wick-Wolfenbiittel  universal  school  attendance 
had  been  enacted,  but  the  Government  were 
unable  to  enforce  it.  Of  course  there  was  wide- 
spread opposition  in  Prussia  as  well,  just  as  there 
was  against  training  camps.  People  refused  to 
send  their  children  to  school.  The  struggle 
between  the  Crown  and  the  stupidity  of  its  own 


TRAINING  OF  TEACHERS  369 

subjects  set  in,  and  it  remains  one  of  the  jewels 
in  the  diadem  of  the  Hohenzollerns  to  have 
successfully  mastered  the  resistance  of  primeval 
prejudice.  Here  the  State  appears  in  its  true 
educative  capacity,  using  force  indeed,  but  to 
enforce  freedom.  It  had  to  face  a  struggle  in 
every  village  throughout  the  land. 

The  schools  themselves  were,  of  course,  of  the 
most  primitive  kind.  This  raises  a  further  very 
difficult  problem,  the  training  of  teachers,  which 
is  the  great  stumbling-block  in  the  path  of  all 
elementary  education.  At  first  the  resources  of 
the  State  were  naturally  very  meagre,  and  the 
expedient  was  tried  of  employing  retired  non-com- 
missioned officers  as  teachers.  These  old  sergeants 
turned  out  to  be  good  village  schoolmasters  of 
their  own  day,  better,  in  fact,  than  those  who  have 
succeeded  them.  Any  one  who  is  not  an  intel- 
lectual coxcomb,  and  who  can  perceive  the 
essential  in  the  training  of  minds,  will  first  concern 
himself  with  development  of  character,  and 
will  admit  that  this  antiquated  system,  in  spite 
of  many  technical  deficiencies,  was  morally  very 
efficient.  The  old  soldiers  could  not  teach  their 
scholars  more  than  they  knew  themselves,  but 
when  we  think  what  kind  of  men  those  scholars 
became  we  cannot  doubt  that  their  moral  in- 
fluence surpassed  its  modern  equivalent.  The 
contented,  devout,  loyal,  patriotic  people  of 
those  days  need  shun  no  comparison  with  the 
present  generation. 

It  is  easily  intelligible  that  to  a  culture  in- 
tensified by  the  study  of  our  classical  literature 
these  old  dominies  must  have  seemed  crude 

VOL.  i  2  B 


370  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

and  ignorant  beyond  endurance.  Then  training 
colleges,  recruited  from  the  people,  were  estab- 
lished and  endowed  by  the  State,  but  it  was 
soon  found  that  the  manufacturing  of  elementary 
school  teachers  is  one  of  the  most  complex 
problems  of  education.  It  is  an  old  truth  that 
to  teach  well  one  must  know  more  than  one 
teaches.  One  must  have  reserves  of  knowledge 
upon  which  to  draw  before  one  can  teach  with 
assurance.  This  applies  with  full  force  to  the 
elementary  school  teacher,  whose  acquirements 
must  go  beyond  reading  and  writing.  But  where 
is  the  line  to  be  drawn  ?  Go  beyond  a  certain 
point  and  you  merely  foster  arrogance. 

Another  difficulty  is  the  situation  of  these 
training  colleges.  With  the  best  intentions  they 
were  placed  far  from  the  big  towns,  with  the 
result  that  their  inhabitants  comport  them- 
selves as  the  lions  of  the  neighbourhood.  They 
become  deluded  by  the  atmosphere  of  these 
academies  into  a  belief  that  they  have  entered 
the  ranks  of  culture.  How  can  an  average 
individual  settle  down  contentedly  in  his  own 
village  after  this  ?  Their  incomes,  too,  are  piti- 
able, and  can  never  become  comfortable.  It  is 
a  contradictio  in  adjecto  to  expect  a  village 
schoolmaster  to  live  in  brilliant  circumstances. 
Unclear  thinking,  as  Jacob  Grimm  pointed  out 
long  ago,  confused  the  modest  service  of  the 
schoolmaster  with  the  transcendent  value  of 
the  material  he  works  upon,  which  is  no  other 
than  the  value  of  the  rising  generation.  The 
management  of  a  farm  requires  far  more  strength 
of  character  and  understanding  than  the  decent 


SECONDARY  EDUCATION  371 

conduct  of  an  elementary  school  demands.  The 
peasant  knows  very  well  that  the  pastor  is  the 
educated  man  of  the  place,  and  pays  him  a  respect 
which  is  not  accorded  to  the  schoolmaster. 

These  are  the  causes  of  the  incongruous 
position  which  so  many  of  our  village  teachers 
occupy.  They  rate  themselves  higher  than  the 
rest  of  their  neighbours,  and  are  ill-humoured 
and  discontented  in  consequence.  They  have 
read  a  little  of  Schiller  and  Goethe,  and  think 
themselves  wiser  than  the  peasants,  even  upon 
subjects  which  the  shrewd  country  folk  know 
more  about  than  they  do.  This  is  the  result  of 
that  smattering  of  education  which  makes  men 
unsatisfied  and  gives  them  a  colossal  self-conceit. 
These  are  the  circles  whence  the  Social-Democrats 
and  the  vulgar  Radicals  draw  most  of  their 
adherents.  The  subject  is  the  more  depressing 
because  the  mushroom  growth  of  educational 
journals  makes  it  impossible  to  touch  upon  this 
sore  point. 

The  vast  improvement  in  the  technique  of  our 
elementary  education  is  the  work  of  Diesterweg 
and  his  followers,  but  the  influence  of  this  same 
Diesterweg  has  also  fatally  promoted  the  im- 
measurable conceit  of  the  teachers. 

In  the  case  of  the  higher  education  of  the 
middle  classes,  the  task  of  the  Government  was 
formerly  simpler,  because  we  were  still  all  under 
the  influence  of  the  mediaeval  classical  education. 
It  is  only  in  our  own  time  that  a  powerful  body 
of  technical  educationalists  has  arisen  alongside 
of  the  men  of  classical  learning,  who  were  once 
the  only  representatives  of  higher  education. 


372  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

The  first-named  have  in  many  ways  the  ad- 
vantage over  the  champions  of  classical  historical 
teaching,  above  all  in  their  utilitarian  sense 
of  future  needs  which  is  far  more  widespread 
among  pupils  in  a  technical  High  School  than 
it  is  in  the  Gymnasia  and  Universities.  This 
shows  the  necessity  for  making  secondary  educa- 
tion more  elastic  than  it  has  hitherto  been. 
The  classical -historical  and  the  technical  in- 
struction must  fall  into  their  perfectly  natural 
divisions,  and  be  conducted  upon  parallel  lines. 
No  one  can  deny  that  they  each  require  a  totally 
different  attitude  of  mind,  therefore  they  must 
be  carefully  kept  separate  from  each  other — 
a  necessity  which  has  long  been  lost  sight  of  in 
Germany.  At  present,  secondary  schools  and 
public  schools  both  trespass  on  each  other's 
preserves.  The  teachers  in  the  secondary  schools 
(Realschule),  because  their  schools  have  been 
less  long  established,  imagine  themselves  affronted 
when  their  scholars  do  not  receive  all  the  same 
privileges  as  the  Gymnasiasts,  and  thus  the 
Gymnasium  eventually  overlaps  the  secondary 
school,  and  vice  versa.  They  are  neither  of  them 
fish  nor  flesh,  and  we  are  on  the  verge  of  having 
our  ancient  learning  and  culture  utterly  destroyed, 
since  an  irresolute  Government  is  ruled  by  a 
Press  which  clamours  more  and  more  loudly 
for  a  universal  education  upon  the  model  of  a 
dictionary  of  useful  information. 

Not  one  of  the  errors  of  modern  Liberalism 
is  more  ridiculous  than  the  idea  of  unified  schools. 
It  is  one  of  the  demands  of  that  conceit  of  culture 
which  has  no  conception  of  culture's  true  mean- 


TRAINING  OF  THE  MIND  373 

ing.  Through  it  our  century  has  become  imbued 
with  the  idea  that  human  education  does  not 
consist  in  developing  a  capacity  for  clear  thinking 
which  enables  every  one  so  trained  to  adapt 
himself  independently  to  circumstances,  but 
rather  strives  to  make  a  walking  encyclopedia 
of  every  mortal  man.  The  ideal  of  our  present- 
day  geniuses  is  to  become  a  glorified  Meyer's 
Dictionary.  So  powerful  has  this  notion  become 
that  it  threatens  to  destroy  the  foundations  of 
all  sound  instruction,  and  would  even  dethrone 
that  systematic  training  of  the  intellect,  which 
endows  it  first  and  foremost  with  the  strength 
and  elasticity  to  form  its  own  judgments. 

The  foundation  of  this  systematic  training 
has  always  been  a  knowledge  of  the  dead  lan- 
guages. We  all  know  that  the  horse  finds  the 
gentle  pace,  which  seems  the  easiest,  harder  to 
learn  than  any.  The  imagination  of  a  child  is 
undisciplined  in  the  same  way ;  this  is  the 
essence  of  its  charm.  Education  must  instil 
precision,  method,  law — in  short,  clear  thinking. 
The  Greeks  trusted  to  the  liberal  arts  to  develop 
the  reasoning  faculty,  but  in  a  less  aesthetic 
world  the  study  of  Art  can  no  longer  fulfil  this 
function.  In  the  Middle  Ages  the  Schoolmen 
tried  to  supply  the  same  need  with  their 
"  Trivium  "  and  "  Quadrivium."  The  scholars 
of  the  Reformation,  although  less  rigid  in  their 
methods,  still  moulded  intellect  upon  a  knowledge 
of  the  classics,  and  Germany  owes  her  supremacy 
in  learning  to  these  schools  of  hers,  which  were 
unrivalled  anywhere.  From  these  narrow  and 
apparently  one-sided  Gymnasia  emerged  the  men 


374  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

of  deep  and  versatile  knowledge,  who  adorned  a 
former  generation.  If  we  compare  the  generation 
of  which  the  men  of  my  own  age  are  the  last 
representatives,  with  their  juniors,  we  see  how 
infinitely  richer  their  knowledge  was.  The  cur- 
riculum of  to-day  boasts  a  greater  breadth,  but 
is,  in  fact,  both  worse  and  weaker. 

Now  the  old  Gymnasia  have  been  spoilt,  and 
the  historical-classical  instruction  which  is  the 
only  foundation  for  all  intellectual  knowledge 
has  been  weakened  or  altogether  supplanted 
by  all  manner  of  physical  science  formularies. 
This  has  been  driven  to  such  a  point  of  folly  that 
the  pupils  have  sometimes  even  been  compelled 
to  study  chemistry.  What  reason  can  there  be 
for  plaguing  the  boys  with  a  few  chemical 
formulae?  Did  not  Goethe  tell  us  that  the 
human  mind  assimilates  nothing  which  does 
not  appeal  to  it  ?  Some  natures  feel  no  desire 
to  know  how  Berlin  blue  is  manufactured.  We 
will  all  pay  our  tribute  of  high  respect  to  the 
really  creative  genius  which  chooses  this  field 
for  its  activities  ;  but  it  is  a  barren  sphere  for 
those  whose  tastes  lie  elsewhere.  A  man  may 
forget  in  later  life  the  knowledge  he  has  worked 
out  upon  his  own  initiative,  but  the  mental 
gymnastic  endures  for  him  as  /CT^/AO,  eV  aei.  It  is 
a  possession  for  him  to  the  end  of  his  days  that 
he  was  able  once  to  construe  a  Greek  sentence 
out  of  his  own  knowledge.  Likewise  it  is  quite 
immaterial  whether  he  still  remembers  what  a 
logarithm  is,  the  important  and  enduring  gain 
for  him  is  that  he  once  could  reckon  with 
logarithms.  It  is  for  this  kind  of  intellectual 


TEACHING  OF  HISTORY  375 

training  that  the  dead  languages  provide  the 
safest  and  most  effective  machinery.  Mathe- 
matics is  equally  useful  up  to  a  certain  point, 
but  it  deals  with  the  kingdom  of  pure  reason, 
while  languages  embrace  imagination  and  reason 
alike. 

No  substitute  will  ever  be  found  for  an  educa- 
tion in  Latin  and  Greek.  These  classical  tongues 
have  a  wealth  of  clear  inflections  which  modern 
languages  have  lost ;  English  has  even  become 
so  characterless  that  it  has  abolished  all  noun 
declensions.  Another  advantage  of  the  dead 
languages  is  that  colloquial  use  can  no  longer 
alter  their  rules,  which  constitute  their  value 
for  training  the  wayward  mind  of  youth.  Then, 
again,  Greek  has  the  most  beautiful  literature 
that  the  world  has  ever  known,  and  Latin  pos- 
sesses such  a  logical  consistency  that  if  an  idea 
is  to  be  grasped  with  perfect  clearness  it  must 
be  expressed  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of 
Latin  syntax,  which  exclude  the  possibility  of 
any  confused  thinking. 

A  classical  grounding,  then,  has  always  been 
the  foundation  of  any  creative  scientific  advance 
among  modern  peoples.  Germans  became  the 
exponents  of  the  most  modern  ideals  in  literature, 
because  for  a  time  we  surpassed  all  other  nations 
in  our  classical  education. 

Now,  however,  we  are  expected  to  jettison  it 
all  because  an  uncultivated  Press  chooses  to 
besmirch  our  public  schools,  and  it  has  been 
reserved  for  our  century  to  discover  that  the 
classics  are  superfluous.  It  is  impossible  to 
exaggerate  the  harm  done  in  this  respect  by 


376  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

contemporary  publicists,  who  have  brought  us 
to  the  verge  of  a  crisis  whose  issue  no  man  can 
foresee. 

We  are  reminded  every  day  how  the  mechanical 
cramming  of  information  is  destroying  not  only 
our  public  schools,  but  our  Universities  as  well. 
The  work  which  should  be  reserved  for  the  latter 
is  often  anticipated  in  the  upper  forms  of  the 
Gymnasia,  by  masters  who  are  unequal  to  the 
task.  The  teaching  of  history  in  schools  can  only 
do  harm  if  it  is  carried  beyond  a  certain  point, 
for  it  will  be  presented  under  the  guise  of  a 
medley  of  half-baked  opinions.  The  best  results 
which  can  be  hoped  for  at  that  stage  will  be 
attained  firstly  by  stimulating  enthusiasm, — 
there  are  certain  great  personalities  in  history 
particularly  adapted  to  impress  the  mind  of 
youth, — and  secondly  by  awakening  the  historical 
sense  which  enables  men  to  penetrate  periods 
other  than  their  own.  Even  a  schoolboy  can 
soon  be  taught  that  every  age  has  had  its  own 
pleasures  and  its  own  moral  standards,  but  this 
perception  is  not  instilled  by  stuffing  him  with 
facts,  but  rather  by  allowing  him  to  live  in  close 
intimacy  with  the  heroes  of  other  times.  This 
historical  sense  is  exactly  the  faculty  which  the 
good  old  -  fashioned  classical  training  aroused  ; 
through  it  the  great  historians  of  former  days 
learnt  from  childhood  how  to  identify  themselves 
with  a  vanished  period.  But  if  we  allow  historical 
instruction  to  be  carried  too  far  in  the  Gymnasia 
it  produces  that  satiety  of  the  intellect  which 
our  University  Professors  so  often  have  to  contend 
with  nowadays.  The  young  men  will  not  con- 


SPECIALIZATION  377 

descend  to  attend  any  more  lectures  on  Herodotus, 
because  they  have  "  done  him  already."  This 
stuffing  of  their  minds  has  been  carried  to  such 
a  point  that  we  may  be  certain  that  when  a 
student  takes  a  course  of  history  he  has  been 
through  it  all  already,  and  that  he  must  devote 
his  mind  to  convincing  himself  that,  despite  his 
seeming  knowledge,  he  is  really  totally  ignorant. 

The  natural  result  of  this  modern  encyclopedic 
instruction  is  to  produce  specialists,  instead  of 
the  widely  cultured  minds  which  were  trained 
by  the  classical  education  of  bygone  days.  It 
is  only  what  we  must  expect,  because  people  who 
have  "  done  everything  already "  only  think, 
if  they  are  industriously  inclined,  of  the  forth- 
coming examination.  They  fix  their  attention 
upon  that  one  fragment  of  the  world's  history 
which  they  desire  to  master,  without  realizing 
that  it  is  but  one  leaf  upon  a  mighty  tree.  Under 
the  terrorism  of  the  newspapers,  and  their  own 
conceptions  of  culture  and  learning,  the  noble 
German  nation  is  crippling  itself,  and  setting 
forth  upon  a  path  of  error  whose  final  end  we 
cannot  yet  foresee. 

One  of  the  first  principles  of  all  education  is 
that  it  comes  from  above.  All  nations  in  their 
natural  development  renew  their  physical  and 
moral  strength  from  the  masses  beneath,  but 
they  undoubtedly  derive  their  real  culture  from 
the  classes  above.  The  wells  of  knowledge  must 
first  be  filled  from  the  heights  of  original  research 
before  they  can  flow  down  to  the  lower  levels. 

Therefore,  if  secondary  education  is  deteriorat- 
ing, the  root  of  the  evil  must  be  sought  in  the 


378  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

Universities,  and  in  the  nineteenth  century  it 
is  easy  enough  to  find.  The  brilliant  epoch  of 
the  Philosophers,  which  was  the  golden  age  of 
teaching,  because  it  produced  a  universal  culture, 
was  followed  by  a  specialization  in  science  which 
was  undeniably  necessary.  Specialists  in  philo- 
logy and  mathematics  were  trained  for  the 
Gymnasia,  and  they  took  the  place  of  the  former 
teachers  who  used  to  undertake  the  instruction 
of  a  whole  class  in  every  subject  except  mathe- 
matics. 

Thus  the  source  of  the  trouble  is  to  be  traced 
back  to  the  Universities,  but  in  spite  of  this  there 
is  no  reason  for  despondency.  The  continued 
increase  of  specialization  in  knowledge  must  at 
last  bring  about  its  own  destruction.  Supposing 
that  a  Professor's  knowledge  of  history  was 
confined  to  a  period  of  twenty  years,  so  that  all 
sense  of  its  continuity  was  lost,  the  ultimate 
reason  for  research  would  vanish,  and  the  very 
springs  of  knowledge  would  dry  up.  The  super- 
fluity of  detail  would  have  to  be  co-ordinated, 
the  parts  would  need  to  be  summarized  into  a 
consistent  whole,  and  men  would  try  once  more 
to  trace  the  thread  of  Divine  reason  running 
through  human  affairs,  for  that  search  is  the  real 
aim  of  all  our  labours. 

The  very  fact  that  we  have  wandered  so  far 
in  the  other  direction  shows  that  the  time  cannot 
be  far  distant  when  the  excess  of  specialization 
will  give  place  to  a  more  intelligent  kind  of 
learning.  As  a  natural  result  of  this  transitional 
period  the  Gymnasia  have  abolished  the  old 
simple  education  which  taught  a  man  to  think 


UNIVERSITY  TEACHING  379 

for  himself,  in  favour  of  the  encyclopedic  form 
of  instruction.  The  inevitable  consequence  is 
the  blase  self-conceit  of  our  average  young 
students.  On  account  of  the  inferior  teaching 
in  the  public  schools  it  is  much  to  be  desired  that 
they  should  all  attend  a  course  of  lectures  on 
philosophy.  The  disgracefully  small  attendance 
at  the  philological  classes  in  the  University  is 
accounted  for  by  the  idea  entertained  by  the 
young  gentlemen  that  nothing  remains  for  them 
to  learn.  Indolence  may  perhaps  have  some- 
thing to  do  with  it,  but  the  real  cause  is  self- 
sufficiency. 

The  appointment  of  the  teachers  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  for  the  University,  and  in 
this  the  German  institution  of  private  coaches 
is  justly  envied  by  all  nations,  as  affording  a 
field  of  free  competition  at  the  beginning  of  the 
academic  career.  There  is  another  reason  why 
our  University  system  has  been  so  particularly 
successful,  and  this  lies  in  our  maintenance  of 
the  principle  that  men  of  great  learning  should 
be  given  the  preference  over  great  teachers. 
This  deep  truth  may  not  at  once  be  apparent 
to  students,  for  the  gift  of  teaching,  or  of  trans- 
mitting thought,  is  so  widely  different  from  the 
gift  of  creative  research  that  it  can  only  be  a 
lucky  accident  if  the  two  are  ever  found  united 
in  one  person.  Savigny  possessed  them  both 
in  a  marked  degree.  Of  the  brothers  Grimm, 
Jacob  was  undoubtedly  the  greater  investigator, 
but  the  worse  teacher.  In  fact  he  was  not  a 
teacher  at  all ;  he  was  so  restless  that  nobody 
could  listen  to  him,  while  William,  on  the  other 


380  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

hand,  was  a  first-rate  lecturer.  There  have  been 
great  men  of  learning,1  like  Gauss,  who  have  never 
felt  the  need  of  teaching.  Thus  we  see  that  natural 
tendencies  differ  widely,  but  if  we  are  driven 
to  a  choice  it  ought  to  be  the  great  scholar 
before  the  great  teacher,  except  in  the  case 
of  certain  specified  subjects.  That  is  the  old 
German  principle,  and  our  Universities  have  done 
well  to  abide  by  it,  because  in  the  long  run 
the  man  who  makes  independent  researches  will 
stimulate  his  hearers  to  investigate  with  him, 
even  if  his  lectures  leave  much  to  be  desired. 
Academic  education  must  aim  at  being  pro- 
ductive ;  it  must  force  its  pupils  into  independent 
lines  of  thought.  One  of  the  finest  characteristics 
of  youth  is  its  ready  recognition  of  genius,  so 
that  we  may  trust  a  real  scholar  to  find  a  following, 
even  if  he  lacks  the  conventional  and  external 
qualifications  of  a  teacher.  Our  Universities 
should  be  aristocracies,  therefore  no  professor 
whom  we  may  appoint  can  be  too  good  for  them. 
When  we  turn  once  more  to  the  subject  of  the 
encouragement  of  art  we  must  not  forget  that 
the  State  should  go  upon  the  principle  that  art 
is  not  a  luxury  but  an  absolute  necessity  for 
a  nation  which  wishes  to  keep  its  place  in  the 
van  of  civilization.  Democratic  institutions  have 
usually  been  very  unfavourable  to  art,  except 
in  the  case  of  a  few  and  usually  very  small 
countries.  There  have  been  a  few  brilliant  ex- 
ceptions to  this  rule,  notably  Athens  in  the  days 
of  Pericles,  but  even  the  Athenians  sometimes 
required  rousing.  When  Pericles  planned  the 

1  Translator's  note  :  "  Gelehrte." 


THE  STATE  AND  ART  381 

glorious  temple  upon  the  Acropolis,  and  the 
populace  began  to  murmur  at  it,  he  declared  to 
them  that  he  would  pay  for  the  pediment  out  of 
his  own  fortune.  That  struck  home,  the  ambition 
of  the  Demos  was  aroused,  and  the  temple  was 
built.  What  a  perseverance,  what  a  delicacy  of 
ear  and  eye  the  Athenians  possessed  in  matters 
of  art !  All  day  long  they  could  sit  and  follow 
a  tragedy  or  a  dance  with  strained  attention, 
not  only  without  fatigue,  but  with  passionate 
excitement,  greeting  with  hisses  every  hiatus 
of  the  orator.  So  sensitive  an  aesthetic  sense  is 
unknown  to  history,  except  in  its  one  counterpart 
of  the  Florentine  democracy  in  its  great  days. 
When  we  read  the  Proclamation  in  which  the 
Signoria  of  Florence  instructed  Arnolfo  the  archi- 
tect of  the  Duomo  to  build  a  temple  which  should 
be  greater  and  more  splendid  than  any  other  in 
Tuscany,  we  see  how  politics  can  be  instinct  with 
enthusiasm  for  art.  We  see  it  also  in  the 
artistic  follies  of  the  Italian  communes  of  that 
date  ;  every  town  wants  to  have  its  own  style 
of  architecture,  in  order  to  outdo  its  neighbour. 
The  people  of  Florence  were  aroused  to  a  storm 
of  indignation  when  artistic  finish  was  found 
lacking  in  a  statue  of  the  Madonna  put  up  in  a 
public  place. 

These  two  democracies,  however,  are  the  two 
exceptions  to  the  rule  that  aristocracies  and 
individual  rulers,  if  they  have  any  aesthetic  gifts 
at  all,  do  the  most  to  promote  art.  Modern 
Parliamentarism  also  displays  a  stupid  indiffer- 
ence towards  its  duties  in  this  sphere.  This  is 
why  it  is  so  difficult  to  get  Parliament  to  sanction 


382  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

the  necessary  outlay  for  artistic  purposes.  Let 
us  remember  with  shame  the  debates  over  our 
new  Parliament  House.  We  had  expended 
millions  and  millions  in  making  it  an  ornament 
for  the  Empire,  when  suddenly  we  were  told  it 
was  too  expensive,  and  stucco  and  imitations 
were  to  take  the  place  of  marble  for  its  interior 
decoration.  It  is  part  of  the  trend  of  our  age 
towards  the  second  best.  We  must  maintain 
that  a  State  which  fails  to  regard  the  encourage- 
ment of  art  as  one  of  its  essential  duties  has  no 
claim  to  be  called  civilized. 

In  the  historical  development  of  the  public 
protection  of  art,  we  find  that  it  figures  quite 
naturally  as  one  of  the  duties  of  the  State  in 
ancient  Athens.  Because  Church  and  State  were 
here  one,  and  because  places  of  worship  will  be 
decorated  so  long  as  mankind  possesses  the  ideal 
sense  at  all,  the  architecture  of  public  buildings 
was  at  once  both  a  secular  and  a  spiritual  concern. 
Polytheism,  with  its  wealth  of  brilliant  figures, 
offered  that  rich  choice  of  types  and  symbols 
which  is  an  essential  requirement  of  all  Art. 
The  Greek  theatres  were  made  splendid  because 
in  their  primary  function  they  were  the  temples 
of  Bacchus. 

Later,  when  Rome  had  become  the  capital 
city  of  the  antique  world,  a  public  of  really  refined 
artistic  taste  gathered  there  from  all  parts  of 
the  Empire.  Thither  came  the  connoisseurs 
and  the  purchasers,  and  there  too  came  a  crowd 
of  Greek  artists,  to  set  forth  the  old  ideals  under 
a  new  guise.  Since  when  have  we  been  able  to 
distinguish  between  Roman  art  and  the  art  of 


ACADEMIES  AND  MUSEUMS         383 

ancient  Greece  ?  Our  own  century  has  been 
the  first  to  perceive  the  deeper  and  more  genuine 
beauty  of  the  work  of  the  age  of  Pericles.  It  is 
a  tribute  to  the  wonderful  endurance  of  the 
artistic  power  among  the  ancients  that  the 
difference  should  have  gone  so  long  unperceived. 
An  important  characteristic  of  aesthetic  life  in 
the  ancient  world  is  that  wealth  was  so  much 
oftener  used  for  the  common  benefit  than  it  is 
to-day.  Every  rich  Roman  presented  works  of 
art  to  the  Theatre  or  the  Baths.  In  Pompeii 
private  persons  built  and  rebuilt  entire  temples 
or  theatres — and  their  statues  were  placed  in 
the  great  Theatre  in  token  of  gratitude. 

In  the  Middle  Ages,  art  took  the  form  of 
those  Associations,  or  Guilds  of  Handicrafts, 
which  are  so  characteristic  of  that  time.  They 
proved  how  art  flourishes  upon  the  fertile  soil  of 
craft,  and  this  is  a  fact  which  will  never  be  lost 
sight  of  in  a  healthy  aesthetic  development. 
It  is  well  known  that  old  Rauch  was  always 
rather  reluctant  to  accept  art-students  as  his 
pupils,  whereas  he  welcomed  iron-workers  and 
stone-masons,  as  being  familiar  already  with  the 
rudiments  of  what  they  came  to  learn.  Art  must 
always  rest  upon  a  foundation  of  craftsmanship. 

Artists  soon  ceased  to  be  satisfied  with  merely 
learning  their  technique  from  a  Master  ;  they 
desired  also  to  probe  the  principles  of  aesthetics. 
Leonarda  da  Vinci  and  a  few  others  were  the 
first  who  attempted  to  give  their  pupils  a  scientific 
as  well  as  an  artistic  education.  This  marks 
an  important  step  in  the  development  of  modern 
art.  Schools  for  painters  were  instituted  in 


384  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

Italy — such  Academies  as  that  of  the  Caracci 
at  Bologna  in  the  seventeenth  century.  Then, 
in  the  reign  of  Louis  XIV.,  the  galleries  of  the 
Louvre  were  opened.  Hitherto  works  of  art 
had  been  designed  to  meet  specific  individual 
requirements  ;  a  church  was  to  be  decorated,  or 
an  audience-chamber  adorned.  Now,  however, 
they  were  exhibited  for  their  own  sakes,  and  a 
critical  public  flocked  at  once  to  Paris,  and 
recognized  the  gems  in  the  store  of  beauty. 
Almost  at  the  same  time  two  French  Academies 
of  art  were  founded  :  one  in  Paris  and  one  in 
Rome,  but  in  its  attempt  thus  to  direct  artistic 
education  the  State  committed  one  deadly  sin. 
Not  content  with  training  students  in  the  theory 
and  practice  of  art,  it  tried  further  to  guide  them 
towards  a  specific  ideal.  This  is  a  contradiction 
in  terms.  If  liberty  exists  anywhere,  the  ideals 
of  art  and  science  must  be  free.  Academic 
teaching  was  positively  harmful  as  long  as  it 
tried  to  instil  a  particular  style.  When  we  walk 
through  the  galleries  of  Schleissheirn  near  Munich, 
where  the  rococo  portraits  hang  in  rows  upon 
the  walls,  we  seem  to  be  wandering  through 
avenues  of  ghosts.  All  of  them  are  on  the 
same  model ;  all  of  them  have  their  mouths  set 
in  the  same  silly  smile. 

The  instruction  in  these  Academies,  under- 
taken and  directed  by  the  State,  is  closely  con- 
nected with  the  establishment  of  Art  Galleries.  It 
is  not  always  possible  to  pronounce  a  general 
judgment  upon  the  functions  of  these  latter. 
Evidently  their  influence  cannot  be  that  of  the 
studio ;  their  object  rather  is  to  present  examples 


THE  HOHENZOLLERNS  AND  ART  385 

of  every  style  and  period.  Their  uses  are  far 
more  to  familiarize  the  public  with  the  history 
and  development  of  art,  which  is  very  necessary 
in  the  barbaric  north.  Schinkel  has  already 
pointed  out  that  this  is  undoubtedly  their  most 
direct  sphere  of  usefulness. 

Throughout  the  whole  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury the  State  tyrannized  over  art  by  imposing 
a  prescribed  taste  in  the  Academies,  and  the 
inevitable  decay  followed.  Then  for  a  short 
period  Napoleon  I.  recalled  the  great  days  of 
Louis  XIV.  Totally  lacking  the  aesthetic  sense 
himself,  and  Philistine  in  the  last  degree,  Napoleon 
conceived  himself  obliged  to  plunder  every  nation 
of  its  masterpieces,  and  to  compensate  his 
people  for  their  lost  liberty  by  giving  them 
artistic  treasures  beyond  all  compare.  Paris 
was  filled  with  a  cosmopolitan  public  of  the 
most  sensitive  taste  and  keenest  judgment,  and, 
artistically  speaking,  we  owe  much  to  this 
accumulation  of  stolen  works  of  genius.  Now 
for  the  first  time  the  greatest  pictures  by  Raphael 
could  be  compared  with  one  another  in  the  same 
place,  and  connoisseurs  could  form  their  judg- 
ment that  their  painter  is  unique.  Naturally 
the  opportunity  was  fleeting,  for  the  impudent 
robbery  could  not  be  allowed  to  be  permanent. 

In  quite  recent  times  the  State  has  learnt  that 
it  cannot  lay  down  canons  of  taste,  and  contents 
itself  with  the  more  modest  task  of  providing 
studios  where  artists,  whom  it  deems  worthy,  can 
train  their  own  pupils.  For  the  rest,  it  merely 
provides  the  elementary  training  for  rising  talent. 
There  are  still  other  ways  in  which  its  interference, 

VOL.  i  2  c 


386  NATIONAL  EDUCATION 

clumsy  as  it  is,  may  do  good,  inasmuch  as  it 
expends  large  sums  upon  enabling  artists  to 
travel,  and  is  as  a  rule  the  only  means  through 
which  the  great  monuments  can  be  set  up. 
Creatively  it  can  do  very  little  ;  its  main  object 
must  be  to  discover  genius.  Next  to  Frederick 
I.,  Frederick  William  III.  has  been  the  great 
Maecenas  among  the  Hohenzollerns.  The  archi- 
tecture of  Berlin  is  determined  to  this  day  by 
the  work  of  Schliiter  and  Schinkel.  Frederick 
William  was  not  really  an  artistic  nature;  he 
had  good  taste,  but  no  very  strong  aesthetic 
feeling.  A  happy  fate  sent  him  men  like  Schinkel 
and  Rauch,  who  only  required  their  opportunity. 
This  is  the  reason  why  so  much  good  work  was 
done  under  his  protection.  It  is  impossible  to 
think  too  highly  of  the  Old  Museum  in  Berlin. 
Its  pillared  hall  was  an  inspiration  of  genius  to 
overcome  the  immense  difficulty  of  designing 
a  building  to  balance  the  huge  bulk  of  the  Castle 
beside  it. 

Truly  at  that  time  the  most  scanty  means 
produced  great  results,  because  there  were  artists 
at  hand  to  do  it.  Frederick  William  IV.,  on 
the  other  hand,  himself  a  skilled  and  talented 
draughtsman  and  modeller,  did  little  for  art, 
in  spite  of  his  expenditure  of  money  upon  it. 
He  had  no  artists  of  genius,  with  the  exception 
of  old  Rauch,  whose  last  good  work  was  done 
in  his  reign;  moreover,  he  could  never  resist 
interfering  with  those  whom  he  employed.  He 
was  for  ever  designing  churches  which  looked 
very  well  upon  paper,  but  are  less  satisfactory 
in  actuality.  Thus  it  is  clear  that  no  aesthetic 


NATIONAL  EDUCATION  387 

enthusiasm  in  the  ruler  can  produce  results  in 
art  unless  the  right  artists  are  forthcoming. 

Our  art  of  to-day  stands,  like  our  education, 
in  an  eclectically  critical  attitude  towards  the 
world  at  large,  and  is  in  imminent  peril  of  com- 
plete stagnation.  We  see  the  danger  in  our  lack 
of  instinct  for  inventing  symbols,  and  creating 
fixed  types  ;  we  have  too  few  figures  which  are 
familiar  to  every  one.  Father  Rhine  is  one  of 
the  best  known,  but  our  most  modern  art  has 
exchanged  him  for  a  Fraulein  Rhine,  with  the 
appearance  and  bearing  of  a  Berlin  barmaid. 
True  art  requires,  above  all  things,  simplicity, 
and  a  pure  and  direct  style ;  it  perishes  among 
such  trickeries  as  these,  which  are  always  trying 
to  imagine  something  new. 

Our  summing  up  must  be  that  the  State  may 
not  meddle  with  the  inner  life  of  art,  which  has 
an  existence  of  its  own,  separate,  robust,  and 
independent  of  the  will  of  the  State. 


XII 
POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

WE  must  now  examine  the  last  of  the  great  tasks 
of  civilized  Society  in  its  relation  to  the  State, 
namely,  in  political  economy.  I  shall  be  brief, 
firstly,  because  the  whole  life  of  the  State  is  full 
of  economic  forces,  and  we  shall  refer  in  every 
section  of  our  study  of  the  Constitution  to 
questions  of  political  economy  ;  and  secondly,  the 
subject  has  long  ago  been  divided  into  a  number 
of  different  heads,  so  that  a  condensed  survey 
is  not  possible  here.  We  will  therefore  merely 
indicate  a  few  principles  which  guide  the  State 
in  its  treatment  of  economic  conditions. 

To  start  with,  it  is  clear  that  the  external 
life  of  the  State  is  more  nearly  affected  by  its 
attitude  towards  political  economy  than  it  is 
by  its  relations  to  religion,  science,  or  art. 
In  all  periods  the  State  has  exercised  more  in- 
fluence over  the  economic  life  of  nations  than 
over  those  more  cultured  spheres  of  activity. 
Yet  even  here  we  must  beware  of  over-estimating 
its  creative  power.  It  would  be  foolish  ever 
to  pronounce  the  State  economically  unpro- 
ductive, for  without  it  and  its  law  no  business 
could  be  carried  on,  and  there  could  be  no  property 

388 


CONCEPTION  OF  PROPERTY        389 

or  security  of  property.  From  the  purely  private 
economic  standpoint  the  taxes  imposed  by  the 
Government  are  a  burden  ;  the  individual  pro- 
ducer is  fully  justified  in  counting  them  part 
of  the  cost  of  production,  and  he  will  strive  to 
get  them  made  as  small  as  possible.  We  must 
remember,  however,  that  the  nation  pays  taxes 
ultimately  to  itself,  and  the  question  is  whether 
the  price  we  pay  is  too  high  for  the  strong  army 
and  the  just  administration  which  we  get  in 
return. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  equally  clear  that  the 
most  important  actions  of  the  State  cannot  be 
valued  by  economic  standards.  The  State  does 
not  exist  for  the  purpose  of  producing  money's 
worth.  Its  work,  like  all  work  which  is  spiritual 
and  moral,  is  above  price.  Such  ideas  are  much 
too  high  to  be  estimated  by  a  money  standard. 
An  artist  may  sell  his  pictures,  but  no  one  can 
say  if  the  price  received  represents  the  value 
of  his  aesthetic  work.  Neither  can  the  value  of 
the  State's  activity  be  judged  by  its  concrete 
results,  be  they  favourable  or  the  reverse. 

The  State's  action  can  rarely  be  directly 
creative,  even  in  economics.  I  have  already 
called  attention  to  the  Stein-Hardenberg  Agrarian 
Legislation  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century.  It  is  the  custom  to  say  that  it  created 
a  free  peasant  class  by  a  re-distribution  of 
property  ;  we  use  these  expressions  loosely  in 
conversation,  but  they  are  not  correct.  By 
these  agrarian  laws  the  Prussian  State  removed 
the  obstacles  which  prevented  such  a  class  from 
arising,  but  the  proportionate  prosperity  of 


390  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

these  peasants  is  due  to  their  own  energy  ;  in 
any  other  nation  the  same  legislation  would  have 
produced  quite  different  results.  The  State  can 
do  great  things  in  protecting,  guiding,  and 
opening  new  paths  for  economics,  but  the  actual 
creative  work  is  done  by  Society  alone. 

Secondly,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
course  of  historical  evolution  sweeps  economic 
life  also  into  the  region  of  perpetual  change. 
This  truth  was  long  overlooked,  because  the 
question  of  property  is  so  intimately  associated 
with  the  subject  of  economics.  The  Roman 
view  of  property,  which  because  Roman  occupies 
so  large  a  place  in  history,  was  adopted  with 
all  its  peculiarities  of  inflexible  rigidity  by 
the  exponents  of  the  theory  of  Natural  Law, 
and  further  expanded  with  all  the  weapons  of 
philosophical  dialectic,  until  it  was  made  to 
appear  a  ratio  scripta  as  immutable  as  the  world 
itself. 

Man  has  never  been  able  to  do  without  some 
legal  relationship  towards  property ;  we  can 
still  trace  the  impulses  which  have  given  rise  to 
the  great  legal  principles  which  control  economic 
life.  The  conception  of  property  is  the  direct 
outcome  of  the  conception  of  the  ego.  Just  as 
the  expressions  "  mine  "  and  "  thine  "  occur  in 
every  language  to  indicate  ownership,  so  the 
consciousness  of  self  contains  the  consciousness 
of  property.  The  most  trivial  experiences  prove 
how  it  is  only  by  his  mastery  over  the  objects 
which  surround  him  that  a  man  can  assert  and 
develop  his  own  individuality.  What  is  the 
origin  of  the  commonest  instruments  which  men 


THE  STATE  AND  PROPERTY   391 

devised  to  serve  their  most  immediate  necessities  ? 
The  hammer  is  nothing  but  an  iron  fist,  the 
spoon  is  copied  from  the  hollow  hand,  in  fact 
the  most  primitive  articles  of  property  are  only 
auxiliaries  to  the  bodily  limbs.  Hence  property 
is  no  arbitrary  idea,  but  is  founded  in  man's 
natural  impulse  to  extend  his  own  personality. 
A  human  being  literally  without  property  aban- 
dons his  individuality,  as  does  the  monk  when 
he  renounces  himself ;  no  genuine  human  exist- 
ence is  thinkable  if  divorced  from  every  form  of 
property.  When  Lassalle  maintained  that  pro- 
perty is  only  a  historical,  not  a  logical  category, 
he  uttered  a  sophistry,  for  it  is  both.  It  is  a 
logical  necessity,  but  set  up  in  the  process  of  time, 
and  consequently  liable  to  change.  It  has  no 
absolutely  invariable  form  ;  in  the  last  resort 
the  State  must  be  the  judge  of  the  conditions 
under  which  it  will  best  express  the  legal  instinct 
and  satisfy  the  economic  requirements  of  the 
nation.  v 

I  have  already  pointed  out  that,  broadly 
speaking,  a  primitive  communism  of  property 
preceded  the  freer  form  of  private  ownership. 
In  early  civilizations,  such  as  the  nomadic  peoples 
knew,  the  land  was  considered  as  belonging  to 
all  alike.  When  the  tribes  of  wandering  herds- 
men learned  to  cultivate  the  soil,  the  right  of 
individual  ownership  was  recognized  in  pro- 
portionate increase  to  the  growth  of  agriculture 
and  permanency  of  settlement  upon  the  land. 
The  history  of  the  German  homestead  is  very 
instructive.  The  possessor  of  the  homestead 
had  firstly  the  sole  possession  of  house  and 


392  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

curtilage;  secondly,  a  limited  ownership  in  the 
tribal  land,  which  he  might  only  cultivate  under 
the  supervision  and  with  the  approval  of  the 
community,  and  in  accordance  with  the  pre- 
scribed rotation  of  crops ;  and  finally  he  had  his 
share  of  woodland  and  pasture,  which  were  not 
divided,  but  remained  the  allodial  property. 
The  peasants  are  imbued  to  this  day  with  the 
old  communistic  notions  which  refuse  to  recognize 
a  law  of  trespass  in  the  woods  ;  hence  their 
proverb  : 

Dem  reichen  Wald  es  Ititzel  schadet, 
Ob  sich  ein  Mann  mit  Holze  ladet. 

To  forests  rich  the  loss  would  not  be  cruel, 
If  some  poor  man  should  gather  loads  of  fuel. 

With  the  growth  of  civilization  this  common 
ownership  was  often  found  impracticable,  for 
the  very  practice  of  joint  usage  soon  gave  the 
strong  so  great  an  advantage  over  the  weak 
that  the  State  finally  was  compelled  to  re- 
adjust unfair  divisions  of  property.  This  inter- 
ference on  the  part  of  the  State  is  perfectly 
justifiable,  for  all  private  rights  of  ownership 
are  subject  to  it,  since  without  its  protection 
we  could  call  nothing  our  own.  Moreover,  the 
historian  cannot  conceal  from  himself  that  certain 
gigantic  upheavals  of  property  have  been  wholly 
beneficial  to  mankind.  Who  is  there  to-day  who 
would  condemn  the  secularization  of  the  Church's 
goods  in  the  sixteenth  century,  which  relieved 
the  Church  of  worldly  possessions  contradictory 
to  its  real  spirit,  and  at  the  same  time  furthered 
the  nation's  economic  prosperity  ? 


DIVISION  OF  PROPERTY  393 

The  public  good  may  require  that  the  pro- 
cedure which  was  possible  and  necessary  in  the 
case  of  the  Church  should  be  equally  applied  to 
the  private  ownership  of  land  and  capital. 
Much  may  be  learned  from  studying  the  different 
methods  pursued  by  France  and  Prussia  in 
ridding  themselves  of  the  burdens  of  feudalism. 
In  France  they  were  abolished  without  any  kind 
of  compensation ;  in  other  words,  a  robbery 
was  committed.  The  result  was  that  the  real 
estate  came  into  the  possession  of  highly 
undesirable  persons.  Contrast  with  this  the 
Prussian  agrarian  laws,  which  adopted,  indeed, 
the  principles  of  the  French  Revolution,  but 
offered  a  just  compensation  to  the  ancient 
owners.  When  Lassalle  draws  his  deductions 
from  the  perfectly  correct  premise  that  acquired 
rights  are  not  absolute,  he  entirely  overlooks  the 
fact  that  the  State  is  not  justified  in  the  sudden 
arbitrary  abolition  of  all  that  has  gone  before,  or 
in  pronouncing  reason  to  be  folly,  and  benefits 
burdens.  On  the  contrary,  when  the  State 
suppresses  a  just  right  it  must  recognize  the 
claim  to  compensation. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  State  cannot 
be  an  agent  of  direct  economic  production.  It 
is,  indeed,  much  more  difficult  for  it  to  influence 
production  and  consumption  than  to  direct  ( the 
partition  of  goods.  To  alter  the  time-honoured 
customs  which  govern  consumption  is  as  hard 
as  to  direct  production  into  new  channels.  These 
matters  are  influenced  far  more  directly  by  the 
free  forces  of  society  than  they  ever  can  be  by 
the  State.  On  the  other  hand,  the  State  has  a 


394  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

good  deal  of  power  over  the  division  of  property. 
Here  I  revert  to  my  former  statement  that  the 
ideal  is  in  no  wise  to  be  sought  in  an  even  ap- 
proximately equal  apportioning  of  wealth.  The 
material  resources  of  mankind  are  far  too  small 
to  secure  even  a  modest  competence  for  all  if 
they  were  equally  divided,  therefore  the  ideal 
could  never  be  realized  even  in  England  with 
all  its  riches. 

Even  theoretically  such  a  notion  is  incorrect. 
The  sound  foundations  for  national  well-being 
are  not  laid  upon  an  equalization  of  wealth,  but 
rather  upon  that  co-existence  of  small,  medium, 
and  large  incomes  which  develop  its  material 
and  moral  strength  in  all  directions.  There 
must  be  people  of  very  slender  means,  lest  the 
supply  of  labour,  upon  which  we  depend  for  the 
satisfaction  of  our  physical  necessities,  should 
fail.  Middle  classes  we  must  also  have,  for  they 
are  the  real  kernel  of  the  nation  and  the  bulwark 
of  the  State.  Medium  wealth  does  not  suffice, 
however,  for  the  great  undertakings  upon  credit, 
and  the  mighty  industrial  enterprises  of  our 
time  which  require  great  capital  sums  under 
one  control.  A  large  amount  of  capital  in  the 
right  hands  is  as  requisite  for  economic  pro- 
duction as  is  a  working  class  to  whom  employ- 
ment is  a  necessity.  We  know  already  that  the 
conception  of  Want,  although  fortunately  it  is 
relative,  can  never  vanish  altogether. 

These  truths  are  unpopular  with  the  present 
generation,  but  they  must  ever  be  repeated 
anew,  for  it  remains  a  fact  that  there  can  be  no 
civilization  without  servants,  night  -  watchmen, 


THE  STATE  AND  PROPERTY        395 

etc.  Therefore  even  theorists  must  contemplate 
with  approval  placing  a  certain  number  of 
persons  in  a  position  which  makes  the  posts  of 
servants  or  night-watchmen  desirable  objects 
of  ambition.  No  one  can  be  too  blind  to  perceive 
that  this  is  so,  and  that  so  it  will  remain.  For 
this  reason  all  the  chatter  about  an  equal  dis- 
tribution of  wealth  is  topsy-turvy,  because  with 
each  tick  of  the  clock  men  are  dying  and  being 
born,  and  still  more  because  no  standard  can 
ever  be  found  whereby  this  equal  division  could 
even  approximately  be  measured. 

The  same  applies  to  the  celebrated  doctrine, 
which  has  been  advocated  even  by  intelligent 
political  economists,  that  goods  should  be  dis- 
tributed according  to  virtue  and  deserts.  This 
is  absolutely  and  utterly  undesirable,  apart  from 
the  fact  that  it  is  impossible  to  carry  out,  since 
the  caprice  of  fortune  bestows  great  wealth  upon 
the  wise  and  the  foolish,  the  good  and  the  bad 
alike,  and  there  is  therefore  a  perpetual  move- 
ment to  and  fro  of  the  social  scale.  The  notion 
has  the  appearance  of  idealism,  but  it  is  really 
only  an  emanation  from  our  modern  materialism, 
which  holds  that  all  that  is  beautiful  and  worth 
having  is  contained  in  visible  wealth. 

A  glance  at  the  moral  ordering  of  the  Universe 
shows  us  that  God  gives  no  external  reward  to 
virtue  in  this  present  life.  Christianity  has 
discarded  the  materialism  of  the  Old  Testament 
dictum,  "  For  it  shall  be  well  with  thee,  so 
long  as  thou  livest  upon  the  earth."  If  virtue 
were  to  receive  its  reward  in  this  world  the 
highest  virtue  would  exist  no  longer.  To  lay 


396  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

upon  the  State  the  obligation  of  dispensing  moral 
rewards  and  punishments  would  be  to  place  it 
in  antagonism  to  ethical  design.  The  poor  man 
finds  his  solace  in  the  thought  that  "  Fortune 
in  giving  gifts  to  man  has  no  respect  for  his 
deserts." 

Is  the  State,  then,  to  bring  home  to  him  his 
own  share  of  blame  in  his  distress,  because  he 
is  a  scamp  and  the  rich  are  virtuous  ?  We  are 
much  nearer  the  truth  when  we  say  that  the 
purest  forms  of  human  virtue  flourish  in  the 
lower  strata  of  society,  and  cannot  be  trans- 
planted to  suit  the  exigencies  of  theory.  Feeble 
indeed  is  the  thought  behind  the  theory  which 
links  freedom  with  success.  There  will  always 
be  capable  men  with  undeniable  vices,  for  the 
gift  of  leadership  does  not  always  coincide  with 
what  is  commonly  called  virtue. 

We  must  remember,  further,  that  efficiency  in 
economic  life  depends  primarily  upon  person- 
ality ;  the  character  of  the  individual  has  been 
its  foundation  always.  The  State  must  therefore 
limit  itself  to  breaking  down  the  barrier  of 
inheritance  which  bars  the  road  to  talent,  by 
making  it  easy  for  talent  to  consort  with  men 
whose  wealth  has  been  handed  down  to  them, 
but  the  system  under  which  they  have  acquired 
it  the  State  may  not  disturb.  The  law  of 
inheritance  places  the  most  various  kinds  of 
people  in  possession  of  great  wealth  ;  the  capable 
and  the  incapable,  the  spendthrift  as  well  as 
the  miser ;  and  through  the  sinking  of  the  in- 
efficient to  a  lower  level,  place  is  made  for  the 
efficient  to  ascend.  So  in  the  end  it  is  nothing 


LABOUR  PROBLEMS  397 

less  than  the  apparently  unjust  inheritance 
system  which  offers  to  talent  the  place  which  it 
deserves. 

We  shall  look  in  vain  for  a  fixed  standard 
whereby  to  appraise  property.  The  worth  of 
different  objects  is  measured  by  the  requirements 
of  society,  not  by  any  abstract  calculation  of 
their  value  in  relation  to  each  other.  The  State 
should  take  no  notice  of  the  working  of  the  law 
of  supply  and  demand,  unless  whole  classes  of 
the  population  are  suffering  from  the  effects  of 
a  disproportion  between  the  two.  While  pro- 
tecting the  existent  dispositions  of  property,  it 
must  take  care  that  the  gulf  between  the  heights 
and  depths  of  society  does  not  become  danger- 
ously great,  and  that  the  lower  classes  are  not 
exploited  for  the  benefit  of  those  above  them. 
It  is  very  difficult  to  prevent  this  entirely  ;  it 
has  happened  in  some  form  or  another  at  all 
times,  but  on  the  other  hand  there  has  also  been 
a  generous  mutual  exchange,  a  give  and  take 
between  high  and  low.  Who  is  it  that  makes  a 
comfortable  existence  possible  for  the  poorer 
classes  ?  Undoubtedly  it  is  their  social  superiors, 
with  the  legislation,  order,  and  security  which 
they  introduce. 

I  have  already  shown  how  it  is  nothing  but 
a  catchword  of  demagogues  to  talk  of  the  dis- 
inherited classes.  Who  has  disinherited  them, 
and  what  was  their  former  heritage  ?  The 
phrase  is  inaccurate,  if  only  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  periods  of  social  calm  preponderate  in 
history  over  periods  of  unrest,  which  are  always 
transitory.  This  being  so,  the  masses  have 


398  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

evidently  been  content  throughout  the  centuries 
with  the  modest  circumstances  of  their  lives, 
and  the  historian  has  no  right  to  import  modern 
standards  of  happiness  and  well-being  into  his 
judgment  of  earlier  periods  whose  ideals  were 
utterly  different.  This  applies  especially  to 
slavery  in  the  ancient  world.  If  we  judge  this 
class  by  the  quaintness  of  their  humour,  we  may 
assert  that  the  Athenian  slave  in  the  hands  of  a 
fairly  good  master  was  quite  as  well  off  as  the 
factory  worker  in  our  midst  to-day. 

Our  free  working  class  undoubtedly  presents 
a  social  problem  unparalleled  in  history.  Their 
lives  are  one  long  contradiction,  because  their 
legal  freedom  stands  in  so  great  a  contrast  to 
their  bondage  to  material  necessities.  By  no 
legal  right,  and  yet  by  the  very  nature  of  the 
case,  factory  labour  becomes  for  the  individual 
glebae  adscriptio.  A  factory  population  is  as 
tyrannically  bound  by  the  conditions  under 
which  it  lives  as  ever  it  was  in  the  days  of  serfage. 
Furthermore,  since  the  human  spirit  can  no 
longer  endure  the  old  bondage  of  those  days,  the 
so-called  Fourth  Estate  is  placed  in  an  extremely 
difficult  position.  Riehl  overstated  the  case 
when  he  denned  it  as  poverty  become  conscious 
of  itself,  for  this  is  an  exaggeration  of  the  in- 
fluence of  economic  considerations  in  human  life. 
There  are  other  forces  at  work  in  society,  the 
moral  forces  of  honour  and  culture,  which  are  as 
important  as  those  of  economics.  We  must, 
however,  admit  that  the  class-consciousness  of 
poverty  has  been  nourished  by  unscrupulous 
demagogues  into  a  deep  and  unhealthy  sen- 


PROFIT-SHARING  399 

sitiveness.  It  remains  for  us  to  try  to  discover 
whether  these  distressing  conditions  are  as  really 
rooted  in  the  essential  conditions  of  modern 
society  as  the  demagogues  maintain. 

Here  once  more  we  are  confronted  with 
Lassalle  and  his  devilish  art  of  turning  truths 
upside  down  and  changing  them  into  lies.  If 
wages  sink  permanently  below  the  minimum 
required  for  the  necessities  of  a  family  the  result 
must  be  that  the  wage-earners  either  die  out 
or  decamp  ;  the  supply  of  labour  will  decrease 
until  a  rise  in  price  once  more  brings  remuneration 
to  the  necessary  minimum.  This  is  Ricardo's 
axiom,  which  undoubtedly  contains  a  kernel 
of  truth.  Lassalle,  however,  forged  it  into  an 
iron  law  ;  he  declared  that  the  wages  of  labour 
must  always  remain  at  this  lowest  level.  On 
the  face  of  it  this  is  a  monstrous  lie.  Ricardo 
only  said  that  wages  could  not  fall  permanently 
below  a  certain  level ;  he  never  asserted  that  they 
could  not  rise  above  it.  It  is  to  a  certain  extent 
in  the  power  of  the  workers  themselves  so  to 
arrange  the  circumstances  of  their  lives  that 
their  wages  can  no  longer  drop  to  the  old  mini- 
mum ;  and  if  a  working  class  is  intelligent,  and 
does  not  waste  all  its  opportunities  in  the  beer- 
shop,  but  turns  them  to  the  improvement  of 
its  standard  of  living,  the  price  of  labour  will 
keep  up  to  the  standard  it  has  attained.  In 
my  young  days  the  labouring  class  in  Saxony 
still  went  barefoot ;  now  it  is  quite  otherwise, 
for  new  and  better  habits  of  living  have  come 
about  and  wages  have  had  to  keep  pace  with 
them.  The  possibility  of  thus  compelling  higher 


400  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

remuneration  by  a  better  way  of  living  is  a 
certain  compensation  for  the  hard  conditions 
which  often  surround  the  existence  of  the  working 
man. 

Another  aspect  of  the  labour  question  in  the 
present  day  is  whether  the  ideal  of  Lassalle  and 
Marx,  that  the  worker  should  be  guaranteed  a 
share  in  the  profits  of  the  industry,  is  just,  and 
whether,  if  realized,  it  would  be  for  the  benefit 
of  the  workers  themselves.  This  much  is  clear, 
that  if  the  workman  shares  in  an  undertaking 
he  must  also  share  the  risks  and  losses,  in  which 
case  an  interest  in  the  whole  business  stands  in 
his  name  ;  but  if  he  refuses  to  take  the  risks  he 
limits  himself  to  the  acceptance  of  a  fixed  wage, 
which  must  under  all  circumstances  be  paid  him 
even  if  it  involves  loss  to  the  employer.  This 
is  how  the  question  stands,  and  there  is  no  doubt 
that  in  most  cases  the  workman  prefers  the  fixed 
wage  to  the  share  in  profits  which  may  turn  out  to 
be  losses  as  well.  Therefore  the  wage  system  is 
not  only  the  most  just,  but  the  best  liked  and  the 
most  comfortable.  This  does  not  exclude  the 
possibility  of  a  percentage  to  be  given  upon 
the  product  of  more  skilled  labour,  where  profits 
depend  to  a  great  extent  upon  the  personal 
efficiency  and  adroitness  of  the  workmen,  but 
this  is  an  exception  which  certainly  does  not 
apply  to  the  ordinary  labourer. 

When  all  these  circumstances  have  been  care- 
fully considered  we  shall  not  be  of  opinion  that 
the  future  holds  much  in  store  in  the  way  of 
co-operative  industrial  associations.  Herr  Schaffle, 
indeed,  gives  a  very  attractive  picture  of  them, 


FREE  TRADE  401 

and  speaks  as  if  they  involved  no  very  radical 
change  in  existing  conditions.  But  the  most 
important  industrial  undertakings  are  the  very 
ones  which  require  a  single  individual  at  their 
head.  The  importance  of  personality  has  been 
misunderstood  in  economics  as  elsewhere  from 
the  time  of  Gervinus  onwards,  and  it  has  been 
still  more  misconstrued  since  his  day.  The  true 
Berlin  Cockney  shakes  with  annoyance  when 
he  has  to  submit  himself  to  anybody,  and  this 
is  the  feeling  which  gives  rise  to  the  delusion 
that  our  industrial  life  can  progress  by  itself, 
without  any  direction  by  intelligent  and  able 
men.  Eventually  it  will  be  recognized  again 
that  the  individual  brain  is  absolutely  indis- 
pensable to  the  success  of  any  business  under- 
taking. When  it  is  only  a  question  of  regularity, 
punctuality,  and  carrying  on  the  work  upon 
lines  already  laid  down,  an  Association  can 
manage  the  affair  as  well  as  the  individual  could 
do ;  but  when  there  is  need  for  a  rapid  speculation, 
and  for  the  sure  instinct  which  seizes  the  exact 
moment  for  action,  then  the  single  judgment, 
which  will  take  all  responsibility  upon  itself, 
will  always  have  the  advantage.  This  being  so, 
it  is  not  probable  that  co-operation  will  ever 
play  a  great  part  in  economic  life. 

Bismarck,  with  his  usual  astuteness,  saw  that 
the  weak  spot  in  the  existence  of  the  modern 
working  man  was  the  insecurity  of  his  means 
of  livelihood.  He  took  the  first  step  towards 
remedying  it  and  providing  a  possibility  of  sound 
social  development  for  the  working  classes  when 
he  instituted  the  system  of  health-insurance. 

VOL.  i  2  D 


402  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

The  modern  State  must  exercise  more  watch- 
fulness than  ever  over  the  poor  and  the  weak. 
It  cannot  prevent  the  alterations  in  economic 
conditions  which  depend  upon  the  circumstances 
of  the  world's  markets;  but  it  can  do  an  im- 
measurable amount  for  its  own  internal  economy 
by  means  of  a  commercial  policy  which  protects 
the  nation  as  a  whole  against  the  foreigner. 
Many  and  various  have  been  the  fluctuations  of 
economic  experience  in  the  nineteenth  century. 
During  its  early  years  the  complete  liberty  of 
commerce  was  the  ruling  idea.  All  the  leaders 
of  the  Reform  party  in  Prussia,  however  much 
they  might  dispute  upon  other  points,  were 
Free-traders  up  to  the  point  required  by  ^the 
State  for  its  self -maintenance.  Free  Trade  was 
necessary  to  give  practical  training  to  the  newly 
liberated  forces  of  labour.  Presently,  however, 
it  revealed  quite  unsuspected  dangers  ;  a  com- 
petition was  let  loose  of  a  strength  undreamed 
of  hitherto*  In  my  youth  it  was  still  an  article 
of  faith  that  a  nation  of  a  certain  measure  of 
civilization  should  allow  free  ingress  to  raw 
materials,  because  it  required  them  for  its  own 
use;  while  on  the  other  hand  it  should  protect 
itself  against  the  manufactured  goods  of  other 
nations  in  order  to  support  its  own.  Then 
suddenly  all  this  was  changed.  New  facilities  of 
communication  brought  products  from  America 
and  the  interior  of  Russia  into  competition  with 
Western  Europe,  since  which  time  all  the  supposed 
laws  of  Nature  were  turned  upside  down,  and 
people  learned  to  be  more  careful  about  applying 
the  expression  "  natural  law  "  to  the  world  of 


CAPITALISM  403 

intellect.  It  all  arose  from  a  certain  combination 
of  historical  circumstances,  and  now  the  countries 
of  Europe  are  obliged  to  protect  themselves 
against  the  competition  in  raw  materials  of 
nations  less  civilized  than  themselves. 

This  is  the  light  in  which  we  must  envisage 
the  protective  Tariff.  To-day  we  have  cast 
aside  as  a  prejudice  that  axiom  which  declares 
the  protective  Tariff  only  necessary  for  the 
defence  of  young  nations.  As  a  matter  of  fact 
it  is  far  more  needful  for  the  long-established 
industries.  The  history  of  Italy  under  the  Re- 
public and  Empire  of  Rome  affords  us  a  terrible 
warning  of  its  necessity.  If  protection  against 
the  import  of  corn  from  Asia  and  Africa  had 
been  introduced  at  the  right  time  the  old  Italian 
agricultural  class  would  not  have  perished,  and 
social  conditions  would  have  remained  healthy. 
Instead  of  this  Roman  merchants  were  suffered 
to  buy  the  cheap  African  grain,  thus  bringing 
distress  upon  the  peasants  of  Italy  and  causing 
the  incredible  state  of  affairs  which  made  a 
desert  of  the  Campagna,  the  very  heart  of  the 
country,  and  encircling  the  capital  city  of  the 
world. 

Facts  of  history  such  as  these  must  be  called 
to  mind  if  we  are  to  judge  calmly  amid  the 
disputes  which  rage  around  these  questions. 
The  State  has  so  great  an  interest  in  securing 
cheap  bread  for  the  mass  of  consumers  that  it 
is  obliged  to  maintain  a  strong  peasant  class. 
For  modern  Germany  it  is  especially  important, 
because  our  peasants  undoubtedly  form  the  back- 
bone of  our  army.  Here  we  have  the  advantage 
VOL.  I  2  D  2 


404  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

over  England,  which  has  no  peasant  class  at  all, 
and  over  France,  where  it  is  too  weak.  One  of 
the  greatest  obligations  laid  upon  our  State 
to-day  is  to  prevent  this  infinitely  valuable  class 
from  vanishing  before  the  advance  of  the  factory 
population. 

The  State  will  have  to  concern  itself  in  the 
near  future  with  the  still  more  important  problem 
of  the  undue  power  of  the  great  capitalists,  with 
all  its  terrible  consequences.  Wealth  such  as 
the  house  of  Rothschild  possesses  must  be  a 
public  calamity  under  all  circumstances.  There 
can  be  no  possibility  of  spending  the  whole  of 
the  income,  therefore  the  capital  increases  rapidly, 
and,  what  is  still  worse,  these  vast  riches  are 
chiefly  cosmopolitan,  and  contribute  very  little 
to  the  furtherance  of  national  well-being.  We 
can  see  on  every  side  the  gradual  sapping  of 
national  prosperity  through  these  colossal  for- 
tunes, and  continual  accumulation  of  money  in 
unworthy  hands  ;  these  are  phenomena  which 
open  a  very  dark  perspective  for  the  future.  It 
is  very  possible  that  the  State  may  some  day  be 
obliged  to  step  in  to  prevent  such  unnatural 
accumulations  of  capital. 

Great  amalgamations  of  capital  have  their 
dark  side  no  less.  The  principles  which  govern 
our  Company  legislation  conceal  many  pitfalls 
for  the  integrity  and  morality  of  the  persons 
concerned.  Most  shareholders  understand  none 
of  the  technicalities  of  the  undertaking  which 
they  help  to  start,  and  are  therefore  very  easily 
deceived  by  a  dishonourable  and  cunning  Board 
of  Directors.  Moreover,  it  is  a  bad  principle 


THE  STOCK  EXCHANGE  405 

which  makes  the  individual  responsible  only  to 
the  extent  of  the  small  portion  of  his  fortune 
which  he  has  invested  in  the  undertaking. 
Nevertheless  we  must  not  underrate  the  value 
of  Joint  Stock  Companies  in  enabling  the  small 
capitalist  to  share  in  the  benefits  of  industry 
on  the  large  scale.  We  have  already  seen  that 
an  industry  which  is  much  exposed  to  the 
fluctuations  of  the  market  requires  above  all 
things  a  strong,  capable  man  at  its  head,  but 
undertakings  which  can  proceed  steadily  upon 
their  way,  more  or  less  independently  of  markets 
rising  or  falling,  as  railways  for  instance  can, 
are  eminently  suitable  for  association  in  the 
form  of  Joint  Stock  Companies. 

The  headquarters  for  the  amalgamation  of 
capital  in  modern  days  is  the  Stock  Exchange. 
Its  present  way  of  existence  will  have  to  be  cut 
short  at  no  far  distant  date.  Even  the  shameful 
experiences  which  we  have  just  passed  through 
once  more  in  Berlin  1  have  not  sufficed  to  impress 
the  need  for  interference  upon  the  corrupt  mind 
of  modern  society,  which  is  itself  to  a  large 
extent  responsible  for  the  corruption  of  the 
Stock  Exchange.  The  time  will  come,  however, 
when  legislation  will  intervene  ruthlessly,  and 
when  that  day  dawns  dealing  in  options  will  be 
abolished  straight  away.  We  may  lay  down  as 
a  principle  for  the  reform  that  the  Stock  Ex- 
changes must  be  organized  into  corporations 
under  the  control  of  an  official  of  the  State, 
and  must  conform  to  stern  fixed  rules  on  pain 
of  expulsion.  The  corporate  sense  of  honour  of 

1  Lecture  delivered  in  January  1892. 


406  POLITICAL  ECONOMY 

our  great  mercantile  profession  must  impel  them 
to  the  duty  of  driving  out  any  black  sheep  from 
their  midst. 

I  must  content  myself  with  these  short  and 
disconnected  remarks,  so  that  we  may  now 
proceed  to  the  study  of  Constitutions  historically 
considered. 


END    OF  VOL.  I 


Printed  in  Great  Britain  by  R.  &  R.  CLARK,  LIMITED,  Edinburgh. 


VIII 


